Sharper00 says: «Are there
valid differences of opinion in the scientific community?
Oh, yes, that really appears to be an acknowlegement that there are
valid differences of opinion within the scientific community.
Not exact matches
I agree with Bill Maher, but then again I'm a lifelong atheist... I have never believed for one minute that the god as portrayed in the bible or koran has any possibility
of being real to everyone, otherwise that god would make itself obvious and not hide behind man made lies and cultural practices that self perpetuate thanks fo fear... otherwise there would not be several thousand man made religions trying to claim that god as their own... yes, it is an
opinion, only
valid to the
opinion holder and no one else... Bill, thanks for so strongly making that point, not that it makes any
difference to god fearing people... they will hold on to their
opinion as strongly as they hold on to their shotgun, thinking that each provides them with some form
of security... to intelligent people, neither is secure and neither leads to true freedom
of the mind...
When the
differences of opinion are about values, economics, intergenerational equity, etc., climate scientists»
opinions on this are no more
valid than anyone elses.
Although there is a
difference of opinion in the «equity» literature about how to consider
valid equity considerations including per capita, historical emissions levels, and the economic capabilities
of nations to fiance non-fossil energies, all nations agree that national commitments about ghg emissions reductions must consider fairness.
However, it allows for
difference of opinion without the law having to decide which
opinion is
valid, and that stance benefits everybody.