> The core of science is debate. The core of science is not debate. It is a cluster of related items such as falsifiability, empiricism, mathematical modeling,

> The core of science is debate. The core of science is not debate. It is a cluster of related items such as falsifiability, empiricism, mathematical modeling, reproducibility etc. It is most certainly not debate. You are confusing politics with science, which in many cases is a very deliberate right wing stance. > There is very little actual consensus in the scientific community about anything... eggs are bad for you This is also false. Argument by analogy with nutrition science is a cop out, because it is unethical to run controlled experiments on human subjects without appropriate consent. However, nutrition is important for society and we make do with weaker correlational studies on biased samples which can evolve or get overturned in the future. Climate modeling is very unlike nutritional or social science and can by modeled consistently.