Quote:
Originally Posted by Head416
I think there's a big difference between not understanding and questioning. It would be a lot easier to just go along with it, and I think that's what most people do. They don't understand it, so when somebody claims some type of intelligence or expertise they say "okay, you must know better than me, I'll just accept what you say at face value".
|
You're right - "arguments from authority" are not necessarily valid arguments. One of the primary foundations of science is questioning. Another is that "science" doesn't ask one to accept the findings without evidence to support them. There is ample evidence out there that climate change is real and is not a product of an inaccurate process or fraud. Many, many varied and diverse studies have all pointed to the same conclusion - man made global warming is a real phenomenon. See for yourself - the evidence is there.
One important factor, though, is that one needs to have some level of understanding to even question. Like many scientific fields, atmospheric science is not easily understood without putting in substantial effort. That's just the way it is. In the absence of "putting in the effort" all we lowly internet forum members can do is either blindly believe what other people tell us (not necessarily a good thing) or we can attempt to understand that this subject is most likely very complex and that the "experts" probably have legitimate reasons to publish the scientific papers that they do. After all, ~ 97% of the scientists in the field accept man-made global warming. Without adequate knowledge of the science involved, I don't think any of us are truly qualified to question the science.
That is not to say that we should blindly "believe" (only religions require that) - but that it is imperative that each of us educate
ourselves before questioning others. In situations where I have taken the time to educate myself on a subject, I've found that the experts are generally experts for a very good reason - they're
right.