Quote:
Originally Posted by CZroe
Did you notice that I didn't take a side? I have neither put myself in the pro-AGW or AGW-denier camp. You, on the other hand, must have some of these elusive "credentials." May I see them?  Yes, you were talking about so-called scientists but may I point out that the pot is calling the kettle black?
Please take my approach next time rather than having a knee-jerk political reaction.
|
I didn't say that I'm qualified to explain that climate change is influenced by humans or that I had a qualified opinion on it. However, I actually am a scientist. I have a Master's degree in Mechanical Engineering from Virginia Tech. I have a bunch of technical publications and one journal article. It doesn't qualify me to know anything about climate change. But rather than rely on political pundits, I've looked into it enough to know that the real experts don't dispute the strong human influence on climate change in the past decades.
Now in my post I referred to the climate change deniers as "THEY". So I'm not sure what you're riled up about. To me, your original post implied that there is a legitimate debate going on. You never explicitly said that, but then again I never accused you of anything. We obviously agree more than we disagree. Most people believe, correctly, that smoking causes cancer. You don't have to have credentials to believe the right thing, you just need to rely on the consensus of the experts. Like I said, nobody is an expert in everything. I never claimed to be an expert on climate change, but I'm familiar with the Scientific Method, and I'm reasonably good at knowing who is qualified to say something, and who doesn't know what they're talking about.
To put it another way: If someone wants to seriously test their differing opinion about climate change, they need to get a Bachelor of Science degree, then a Master's Degree, then work in their PhD., study climate change for years, then try getting their results published in their respective journal. That is, getting their work scrutinized by a group of their peers in the field. Once that is done, then they can report back here and share their findings. If one is not willing to make that commitment, then one should rely on the people who've already done this for the truth. That's my opinion.