All kinds of "absolute tests" are generally wrong. For instance, your climate change (which was called until a few years ago "global warming") test rubbed me t

All kinds of "absolute tests" are generally wrong. For instance, your climate change (which was called until a few years ago "global warming") test rubbed me the wrong way because you mentioned the "climate scientists". There is no such thing as a climate scientist because there is no climate science. There is climate research or climate studies but not Science. Science means application of Scientific method: (a) making observations -> (b) formulating hypothesis (falsifiable predictions) -> (c) proving or rejecting the hypothesis through experimentation. Climate studies lack the third step and therefore they are not science. Should I dismiss the rest of your argument based on my own test of "the person fails to understand the difference between science and ontology"?