Quote:
Originally Posted by ryberg
About what other scientific claims can it be said that a group of thousands of international researchers were unanimous with a 90-99% degree of certainty? Maybe that the earth is a sphere, or that evolution, not creationism, is on target in terms of explaining natural biology, or that water is composed of hydrogen and oxygen.. perhaps that the moon orbits around the earth...
But already I find that this is precisely where I came in, so perhaps it's a good time to resume avoiding these discussions, again. 
Steve |
Steve,
The mistake you're making is that you somehow link a group of scientists who say nothing that isn't self evident with 90-99% certainty. They linked man made pollution to climate change? Wow what a stretch. Of course man has a part in climate change, I'll go on record with that as a 100% certainty. The question is really ....by how much? Is it 1% or 90% of the problem? No one is denying that temperatures have increased, or that sea level is rising......they have been for 1000s of years.
The answer to the problem is simple. Show me empiracle evidence that says X amount of CO2 = X amount of climate change. This is where the IPCC falls apart. Feet are shuffled, "Denier" is cried, but at the end of the day there is no direct evidence on the amount of impact. The hook, line and sinker crowd starts to try and browbeat anyone who urges caution. Any scientist who disagrees is labeled rouge. False analogies are made between simple immigration problems and complex environmental systems.
Of course pollution is bad. But how bad? Do we treat it with changing a few bulbs or nuking the oil fields of the middle east?