Husar, are you sure the ozone hole is fixed? I was sure there were more chemicals they wanted to ban… Or it may have fixed it when they ended the Concorde flights. I am sure it will come back into the mix sooner or later.

Never assume what others tell you is so. Do your own research. Please!

Beskar, the term deniers would seem to point to having a deep belief in the proposition without a deep understanding of the science. It is a political statement and making a political statement on science…well.

A part of the problem is that it is not measurable. We may choose to measure some data but much can not be and what is measured, where, and when induces bias. We are hampered by our own ignorance of the complexities. We are as yet unable to devise a computer model that can replicate the past, let alone forecast the future.

It is a reasonable assumption that man has some impact on climate but it is impossible to say what that effect may be. But it is just an assumption.

My first inclination was to support the idea and that opinions to the contrary were relying on a false data set or some other bias. I would have been comfortable holding on to my beliefs but I did want to know who and why.

While I admit I was predigest against energy corporations which were primarily the opposition, it didn’t mean that the science was wrong. Contrary to my assumptions it was government and think tanks that were presenting a false narrative and using money and influence for other ends.

We don’t see climate change around us. All we see is weather. Anything occurring has to last for decades before it is even noted as a trend. We are rushing in without proper understanding. There is great pressure to jump to conclusions. It is entirely Political. It is not scientific. It has become an emotional issue and political litmus test. Most promote the utmost ignorance in an effort to convince an ill informed populous. Common knowledge can be profoundly wrong and popular assumptions dangerous.

I only suggest that you delve into it more deeply, into the scientific discipline its self to reach understanding of the complexities. Consensus is not scientific. Science is not decided by popular vote.