re: #136 RogueOne

What would you expect them to say? I’ve had this argument before, scientists are no different than anyone else. They all have their biases built in, the longer they work in an area the more positive they become. People are people.

That’s irrelevant; scientists may dig in their heels, but research proceeded unabated, and if a scientist takes a stand that’s wrong, he just gets proven wrong. You seem to be intimating that the biases of scientists always corrupt research, which would mean we would never have gotten anywhere, scientifically. A scientists is someone who actually lets themselves be proved wrong by their own experiment— which happens all the time in science. If you distort data, you will be exposed, and shamed.

Maybe I’m overly skeptical but when someone tells me their 90% sure of something I know they can’t possibly fully understand it sets off bells.

How on earth can you think you know the subject well enough to say that? If a scientist tells you that there’s a 90% chance a certain fuel/air mixture will ignite when a spark enters it, do you think the fact we still don’t really understand the weak nuclear force matters?

I’m not denying the existence of warming, I just have a problem with declaring it’s completely humanities fault when we can’t possibly know that.

Do you see any irony in declaring yourself knowledgeable enough about climate science to make that statement?