> Like the climate issue, there's no debate about this either, at least among scientists.

Of course there is debate among scientists. That's what scientists do. Those who do not debate are generally agnostics, apathetics or ideologues. 

> Much public discussion on global warming is underpinned by two partly self-contradictory assumptions. The first is that there is a "consensus" of qualified scientists that dangerous human- caused global warming is upon us; and the second is that although there are "two sides to the debate", the dangerous- warming side is overwhelmingly the stronger. Both assertions are unsustainable. 

> The first because science is not, nor ever has been, about consensus, but about experimental and observational data and testable hypotheses. Second, regarding the number of sides to the debate, reality is that small parts of the immensely complex climate system are better or less understood – depending upon the subject – by many different groups of experts. 

> No one scientist, however brilliant, "understands" climate change, and there is no general theory of climate nor likely to be one in the near future. In effect, there are nearly as many sides to the climate change debate as there are expert scientists who consider it.  

--  R M Carter, Professor, Marine Geophysical Laboratory (Node C), Sporing Road South, James Cook University, Townsville, Qld, Australia

             ***********************************************
The BEE-L mailing list is powered by L-Soft's renowned
LISTSERV(R) list management software.  For more information, go to:
http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html