Quote:
Originally Posted by Biochemist
To my knowledge, there is no contest that CO2 rose over the last century. There is also certainly no contest about whether C02 can act as a greenhouse gas. The issue is...
|
When you say "there's no contest" you are as much as saying: "there's widely-held scientific consensus". You are setting the parameters of debate by acknowledging scientific consensus.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Biochemist
In this discussion it is nice to avoid references to the "consensus" of scientists. Nothing in science is decided by consensus. Science is not a democracy.
|
Yet, we should avoid doing that, should we?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Biochemist
Most folks see this sort of presentation and proceed to attempt to discredit the source or the sponsor (as has been done in previous posts). I think this forum deserves to focus on the underlying science, not the perceived biases of the contributors.
|
Bias goes to credibility. Of course the credibility of the source is valid. The crazy nut on the street corner holding a bible and shouting "the world is going to end" is less credible and more-easily ignored than a NASA press conference announcing the same. There is nothing improper about considering the bias of the source.
~modest
