Quote:
Originally Posted by Dadhawk
All of this is a lot of attention for groups that are believed to be numbered somewhere from a few hundred to maybe a few thousand. Also, some of the groups are self-admitted not "true believers".
Personally, I think it's good in most scientific endeavors to have skeptics. After all, "science" is not always right nor does it have all the answers. Just because scientific method is applied to the discovery or explanation of something does not mean, at any point in time, the result is accurate.
|
Where did you get these numbers? Many celebrities and athletes have stated to be flat earthers or very skeptical about this globe theory, obviously being somewhat more conservative in their statements to the press than probably how they talk online, I’m sure.
These numbers aren’t small, but even if only 2% are strong believers that the earth is flat, only 1.7% identify as gay or lesbian, and I know plenty of them because there are millions of them.
https://blogs.scientificamerican.com...might-be-flat/
https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.e...y-people-lgbt/
As science advances with more and more evidence, overarching theories to explain the world are proposed like String Theory vs Loop Quantum Gravity Theory. These theories or models for explaining nature gets challenged by more data and studies, as the predictive powers of the theories gets tested. Eventually, a single model emerges like Darwin’s Theory of Evolution by Natural and Sexual Selection that is so robust and so powerful in its predictive abilities that it becomes an adopted Scientific Theory.
Climate science may not have a need for a grand theory, but the models themselves will get more and more robust over time at their ability to predict what long term warming trends will come from anthropogenic factors. At this point, the evidence is robust enough for the scientists who study the subject, as it was to scientists relative to the public of the past, as it pertains to the Darwinian Theory, for instance. Over time, the public will catch up to the scientists when the counter claims have lost their credibility in the face of the avalanche of data that eventually overwhelms any opposition. This has historically played out many times, and I won’t be surprised to see it happen again.