[SUMANTRA] Much less than destroying the planet, climate change isn’t even a settled science.
[GALILEO MOVEMENT] The so-called ‘settled science’ was settled before IPCC science started.
[AMY] Except for the left, science is literally a belief system. It’s their religion. This is how they can argue that gender is a social construct while climate change is “settled” and keep a straight face.
Objections and Replies
§1. Climate science is not settled. –
If science was settled in the way you suggest, there would not be any scientific paper to publish.
§2. Science is never settled! –
If science could not settle anything, why would we call it science? There are things we know well enough not to worry too much about them. “Science is settled” only means that the basic ideas are well understood.
§3. Prove that science is settled! –
Confer to the IPCC’s reports. Some things are settled, some things are not, and empirical sciences have no means for ultimate settlement. Like a proof, wink wink.
Your search engine should give you pages of contrarians whining about “but settled” without any real source to the claim. I have yet to find a clear, stable source. So the first move should be to ask contrarians to source their claim.
Stephen Schneider has a talk called “Is Science Settled?”