I’m going to confess I’m lukewarm on this. Part of my issue is that science works to prove its explanations wrong. That is something I never see mentioned - or have I missed it?
Let me answer, please.
You’re absolutely right.
In fact, scientists should always be skeptical. They should especially be skeptical of their own theories, and work hard to always ensure the data leads to impeccable results.
That the left-wing community of so-called scientist/political agitators want to label anyone who doesn’t agree (that global warming is due to human industrialization) a denier—like they are Nazi sympathizers, is down right despicable and has no merit in science.
A logical Ad Hominem fallacy.
When a scientist only gets funded for saying global warming is real he has no incentive to actually conduct real science
In times past, I would have been in your camp. Lukewarm on the whole issue. However, I am old enough to remember the Coming Ice Age that was in vogue in the mid 70’s. When that was being written about, a list of solutions was pushed. These included, quit using fossil fuels, including coal and petroleum. Instead, use solar and wind instead for power generation. When they switched to Global Warming, imagine my surprise when the solutions were identical! The other red flag was that these wizards of smart gave us some dire predictions to watch out for, and not a single one has panned out. The poles still have ice, drought has not starved the planet and the hurricanes that were supposed to decimate the east coast have not materialized. When they can’t get it right in the near term, why should I trust that they have it right in the long term? And why should I gamble the worlds economies that they will.
‘I’m going to confess I’m lukewarm on this.”
There is no valid scientific basis for being “lukewarm” on the subject of Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW), also known as Climate Change. The entire AGW conjecture is based upon pseudo-scientific claims which the scientific principles and experimental evidence demonstrate to be respectively contrary to the fundamental laws of physics and contradicted by observations.