Sunday, December 4, 2016

Are humans contributing only 3% of CO2 in the atmosphere?

This is why rational people accept the scientific consensus on issues like this (scientific issues), rather than believe bloggers, politicians, corporate CEOs, or entertainers when they spout off about things they know nothing about.

Naturally, that's assuming that you care about the truth of your beliefs,... but I did say "rational people," remember.

And I definitely include this blogger, when it comes to issues of scientific fact, rather than opinion. I'm not a scientist myself - any kind of scientist, let alone a climatologist. I'm strictly a layman. I'm just smart enough to accept the scientific consensus where there is one (because it's obvious that the scientific method works, and I have a general idea of why it works, too).

I've had idiots accuse me of believing Al Gore. Well, Gore is a smart man, no doubt, but he's not a climatologist. I don't believe Al Gore. Al Gore and I both accept the scientific consensus, that's all. (Well, I did note that he was a smart man.)

You see, I don't get my science from politicians. I don't even get my science from individual scientists. Picking and choosing which scientist to believe would be no different from just picking and choosing what you wanted to believe.

Scientists are only human, and you can't get all human beings to agree on anything. Even with a worldwide consensus, you could undoubtedly find some scientist who disagreed - maybe even within the appropriate field of study, too. That means nothing. A consensus doesn't mean unanimity.

So of course I accept the worldwide scientific consensus on issues like global warming, evolution, the age of the earth, and other matters that are only 'controversial' outside of science, not among the people who actually know what they're talking about.

But don't use me as an authority. Again, I'm no scientist. I have an educated layman's understanding of science, at best. Indeed, even if I were a scientist, it would be impossible to become an expert in every single field of science.

Luckily, that's not necessary. It's easy enough to determine the worldwide scientific consensus, where there is one. And where there isn't, the proper action is to reserve judgment.

No comments: