Jim Henderson <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote:
> There are those who believe in climate change not because they've applied 
> any rigor to it, but they have a "sense" that it's true even though they 
> haven't studied it personally.  They "take it on faith" that the science/
> scientists who support their point of view have done their homework.

  To be fair, in subjects that I understand very little about (if anything
at all) I'm prone to believing the scientific community (especially if it's
widely accepted) a lot more easily than anybody else. The reason is that
I know (at least a bit) how science works and why it's more reliable than
other forms of "investigation". Hence if two differing claims are made
about an obscure subject, I find science's claim more reliable by default.

  So far I have had very few disappointments with this (if at all).
All the disappointments have been on the other direction.

> (Incidentally, "UFOs" - are real.  I see things in the sky every day that 
> I can't identify - so for me, it is a flying object that's 
> unidentified. ;) )

  As I commented in another post, sometimes we should just accept
colloquialisms as they are, even if they are technically speaking incorrect.
Language changes and fighting against it is not very useful.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message