Flame — HabitableZone

Flame » in reply to Re-state that in a less ambiguous manner, please.

re: Re-state that in a less ambiguous manner, please.
TB — (archived)

To put it very informally, climate science seems to be about where evolutionary science was before genetics was discovered and solid molecular evidence began to accumulate.

Science has no frigging clue exactly what is going on with the climate on anything other than the largest scale, and even there, they're still finding new mechanisms all the time that affect the outcome. This does not make them stupid, it just means they are dealing with a huge and chaotic system. Just as one example off the top of my head, how recent are the discoveries of the actual effects of deep ocean currents on world climate?

I don't think we have enough hard answers to justify the massive knee-jerk economic and industrial disruptions being advocated at almost every level of society (all of them, by coincidence I'm sure, resulting in much more power to centralized authorities and less choice and freedom for the individual.)

I do think continued research is a good idea, and I also think there are other reasons besides AGW for doing some things, like building nuclear reactors and reducing our use of oil for transportation.

Too many AGW advocates are operating on the same level as those religious people who say "God said it, I believe it, that settles it." And too many, including most of the scientists, seem unaware that politics is driving the issue a lot more than the science is.

Log in or register to post.

The whole thread (100 posts)