The science in favor of vaccination is very straightforward and well-understood. It's easy to run double-blind tests and determine the truth of the matter. The

The science in favor of vaccination is very straightforward and well-understood. It's easy to run double-blind tests and determine the truth of the matter. The science in favor of anthropogenic global warming includes two parts: well-understood physics and chemistry (which is quite trustworthy and is actually science), and a bunch of conflicting computer models of a chaotic and poorly understood system with a huge number of inputs and feedback loops (which I'm not sure why anyone trusts). This blog post puts it pretty well: http://blog.dilbert.com/post/158778029326/how-to-change-my-biases-on-climate-science http://blog.dilbert.com/post/158778029326/how-to-change-my-b...