There’s never going to be 100% consensus because there is no such thing in science. There is always room left for doubt and modification of current theory. It’s why science has advanced so much further than religion and philosophy that get stuck on unquestionable “truth” then spend centuries arguing over how many angels you can fit on the head of a pin.
Science must not just “work” once then be discussed ad infinitum, it must be consistently demonstrated to function in the real world or it isn’t science.
And as I’ve already posted the science that underlies human forced climate change is the very same science that underlies the transistor electronics that enable “people” like Mike Yohe to participate here.
If Mike Yohe is claiming that the science of climate change doesn’t work - which is all he’s doing over and over with no evidence at all - then he is also claiming that the science that allows him to post here in the first place doesn’t exist.
Let’s just treat him in the same manner, if his position is so illogical it doesn’t even allow the existence of the means to participate here then what is the point in addressing anything he has to offer.
It is all counter to reality as we experience it, having someone post over and over that reality isn’t real isn’t being part of a rational discussion on the nature of reality as informed by that most power of tools we now have to describe reality in objective terms - the scientific method.
Mike Yohe is essentially rejecting the scientific method itself because it clashes with his clear biases. What is more likely, the method of inquiry that has given us an understanding of the universe in ways that have completely revolutionized our understanding of reality is all wrong and not applicable at all to natural phenomena.
Or that someone who is clearly part of a well documented disinformation campaign to deny extremely well supported science doesn’t have a clue what he is talking about.
I’m pretty sure it’s the second one.
If Mike Yohe wants to pretend that the most significant informational advances in human history simply don’t exist then let him do so… but that is exactly what climate change denial does. In the end it must deny the existence and clear strength of science itself to describe in functional terms how the universe operates.
We just saw a thread here that attempted to discount science totally because it’s not the “truth”.
If we let people like Mike Yohe define what is real then we are doomed and that is already happening. The province where I live and have spent most of my life is burning up again this summer in a process that will only get worse in coming years entirely because highly irrational people like Mike Yohe have been setting policy for years. This is a growing catastrophe that will hit everyone everywhere.
This is 2017 not 1988 or even the mid 1970s when the US Congress began hearings on human forced climate change. Deniers could claim then with a tiny amount of justification the evidence wasn’t there to support climate change but that is long gone. The science is clear now.
And so deniers should be gone, they play no role now other than cheer leaders for the unfolding Holocaust.