Quote:
Originally Posted by Taf
Ignored? Perhaps not. But make it the big scare story that provided loads of "scientists" with full income for years and years? Often repeating each others' data over and over without ever really doing any real science?
|
But it wasn't wrong. They were right. It's just they knew what caused it and there was considerable public demand for something to be done. So they all but abolished CFC gas. The fact it's now speculated that it may increase warming near the polls is an unfortunate result of the world not being perfect but they were not wrong at all.
Quote:
|
Those that did the science (some decades ago) often got it wrong, or failed to truly evaluate what the data said. Hypothetical models were made and they still got it all wrong. Then satellites started to actually measure depletion.
|
Why do people expect branches of science to come fully formed? Aristotle is one of history's most famous scientists and he was wrong about motion but he was proven wrong by Galileo conducting experiments and not by the people later threatening to burn Galileo at the stake for saying the Earth wasn't the centre of the Universe. Darwin is famous for evolution and even though he got large parts of that wrong however idea was correct and the scientists which later contradicted him were set on that path by him.
It is unremarkable that science is sometimes wrong but that's the nature of something that exists on the fringes of things we do not know. It is much easier to look back and scoff at them being wrong before but we're not smarter than Aristotle just because we know the Earth revolves around the Sun.
Climate change will be proven wrong if people come up with evidence debunking it or proving it's been driven by another cause. The fact is that evidence has not yet emerged which is why skeptics resort to pointing out that science can be wrong. Science already knows that.