50 scientist's speak,verifieable., page-35

Wow, a Nobel Prize winning physicist? I bet he knows enough about climate science to have a sophisticated reason for disagreeing with people who spend their lives researching the subject! Never mind that he isn't an expert on the topic. He has a Nobel Prize!

Some of you may have recognised that the previous paragraph was intended as a sarcastic retort. The reason for my doing this is due to my opinion being that this topic's premise is nothing but unfettered fallacious use of argument from authority.


I hate to have to do this again, but nobody ever seems to want to comment on these:

.

.

.

.


In the interests of balance, and given this is the third time I've had to say the following, I figured that since I'm a scientist too, I was eligible to add myself to the list above, as scientist number 51:

51. Dr andrewm457: "It is simply extreme hubris to assume your own frail non-expert assessment of a detailed scientific area is superior to the consensus of opinion of scientific experts in that area. A non-expert's understanding of the evidence is a mere shadow of an expert's understanding, and while you can always find people on the fringes of any area to agree with a range of topics, the safest bet is to assume that the people who spend their lives researching these topics do actually know more about the topic than you do."