There are two sides to every argument. This is the very definition of an argument. If there weren’t two sides, we wouldn’t have an argument. What we are looking for, fundamentally, is a side of the argument in which we see the most positive support of the issue. We want answers to our questions and evidence to back it up.
Lately, I have read several articles that state scientists have come to a consensus that the earth is warming. First, this is inaccurate, as there are still many scientists who are skeptics. Second, I have to agree with the great author, Michael Crichton when he said:
“Historically, the claim of consensus has been the first refuge of scoundrels; it is a way to avoid debate by claiming that the matter is already settled. Whenever you hear the consensus of scientists agrees on something or other, reach for your wallet, because you’re being had…. Let’s be clear: the work of science has nothing whatever to do with consensus…… In science, consensus is irrelevant. What is relevant is reproducible results. The greatest scientists in history are great precisely because they broke with the consensus.”
As a scientist, I am offended by the term, “consensus.” Science is not about consensus. Much is hypothesis, theories… But above all, there are questions and the thirst for finding answers. Once scientists come to a “consensus,” no more questions are asked and no more knowledge is gained. This is the end of existence.
So, what is the answer to the question, “Does global warming exist?” That is for you to decide… We all have our opinions. I just hope the question keeps being asked and the argument continues to be fought. This is our motivation to find the truth through research.
Katie
