Formaldehyde said:I would contend the scientific perspective is that the subject is still open for debate and subject to further research, instead of pretending that everything has already been completely resolved with no room for dissent merely because there is 'consensus' amongst a number of scientists and prominent laymen with their own obvious political agendas.
Such is the way with real science as opposed to sophistry. The bottom line is that science isn't a democracy. It doesn't really matter how many people believe one particular interpretation of the facts. Just ask Copernicus and Galileo.
I agree with Formaldehyde on something, amazing.
Princeps said:A lot of the deniers are soaked in corporate money. If there was real evidence against manmade global warming, it would be out already and the proponents would be discredited.
But there isn't.
Since when is Greenpeace any better?