Some things are inconclusive. Like exactly how much warming will be experienced in a given period of time. But the amount is not in question. That is a matter of physics. And that has been settled for more than a century.
Which is why we make models. And then compare projected changes to observed changes. So far, the projected changes have been too conservative, we are experiencing warming faster than projected. When that happens, the reasons are investigated and the new information is used to refine the models. Sure, I suppose it is possible that the models might suddenly produce values that are higher than observation. If so, that will be corrected for.
As to your totalitarianism claim, that is just bullshit. The evidence is perfectly clear they are wrong. No question about it. Even then, if they have no economic benefit in expressing their bullshit, it is perfectly legal for them to do that. But if it is in their economic interest to promote false information and they have reasons to know that, then that is known as "fraud". No economic benefit, they can spout whatever nonsense they want, no problem. But if it makes them money, that changes a lot of things. It is no longer just an opinion. Now, if it isn't clear that they are wrong, even that isn't fraud. Which is why they, and the tobacco companies before them, wave their hands and claim that the science isn't clear. But, that isn't the case any more. Sure, 40 years ago it could be reasonably said that all the results aren't in. But that window closed decades ago. |
