Quote:
Originally Posted by MuseChaser
Just in general....
If folks approached scientific research and data with no agendas, no focus on personal financial or other gains, nor any preconceived notions or goals other than a greater understanding of events, the conclusions being widely published would undoubtedly be quite different... not to mention much more accurate.
There ARE experts.. many of them.. who do not share the prognoses promoted by the perpetrators of this thread. Perhaps, in the interest of accuracy (of course, who wants THAT, right?), the thread should be renamed "One of Many Possible Prognoses for the Planet, According to Some Self-Professed Experts and Their Followers."
|
97% of climate scientists subscribe to the theory that the evidence suggests humans are the cause of the warming. We could ignore the experts. In general, dumping carbon and methane in the air is likely not a good ideal. We reversed smog and ozone destruction. I don’t see why this is so much harder for people to understand or rally behind.
Regardless, fossil fuels are finite resources. We need to move to renewables eventually, so it doesn’t matter what we feel or believe about the harmful effects of burning fossil fuels. We need to eventually transition off of them.
Also in general, scientists have their own politics and beliefs, but they tend to be humble, apolitical and without motives that go beyond understanding their world and providing society with knowledge and applications.