|
It just occurred to me that it seems pretty silly to be referring to science as the ultimate arbiter in this debate. I mean, on the one hand, yeah, what other option do you have right? On the other, you've got scientists running research funded by the green lobby which says omg those bad people with their bad CO2 are killing the world, and you've got other scientists running research funded by people with other interests saying omg CO2 is negligible.
So talking about what Science would say at this point seems a bit like talking about what a person with multiple personality disorder might claim on any given day.
|
You confuse science with think tanks. There is no great debate in the scientific world; the vast majority of minds and the overwhelming majority of evidence points in one direction.
This thing is sticky, and I don't like it. I don't appreciate it.