3 ms·
Climate science isn't settled, although the data is compelling, more needs to be done and level set, separate wheat from the chaff. Investigate incentives, cens
by systemvoltage 4y ago
Climate science isn't settled, although the data is compelling, more needs to be done and level set, separate wheat from the chaff. Investigate incentives, censorship and funding. Evidence is nowhere as strong as defining the radius of the earth or questioning the law of Gravity.
There is a giant machinery of Big Tech + ESG + Environmentalists + MSM that's spinning up the public opinions on climate change to the point where it is everywhere from products we buy to Apple keynotes, from Tinder profiles to corporate PR releases. It has become a religion of sorts. That alone makes me question every aspect of the policies, but also the underlying science.
We need more debate, not less.
- Dracophoenix 4y agoWhile I agree in the general sense that climate science is worthy of scrutiny (as any other science is), anthropogenic contributions to climate change have been proven to 5σ certainly via satellite data for some time now. It's not as certain as the radius of the earth at a given point in time, but it is as certain as the existence of the Higgs boson. At this point, any contrary assessment would requires an extraordinarily robust rebuttal.
- pstuart 4y agoIf you're going on the "science is corrupted because they have an agenda" route, then perhaps include the fact that the fossil fuel industry is highly incentivized to subvert science to protect their profits.