Since when does science rely on "consensus?" Isn't it supposed to rely on facts and data? Aren't we supposed to vigorously test our theories? Apparently not in the case of global warming. In this, consensus rules. This article is an excellent critique of the science of global warming.
From the article:
What I see, [in the science of global warming] rather, is something that political theorist Paul Feyerabend wrote about a long time ago in Against Method (1975): the tendency of scholars to protect their theories by building defences around them, rather than being the first to try to demolish their own proposition.
No comments:
Post a Comment