D
Dr Jello
Guest
So many answers I get regarding the theory of "Global Warming" deal with science not being able to determine anything to be 100% proven.
For example this comment is common - "The only absolutes in science are the immutable laws of the universe (and even these aren't 100%). Everything else is probabilities. For most natural science 90-95% is as good as it gets."
So if nothing can be proven false, then is everything considered probable? Do people who believe like this think there's a chance that Alchemists are correct, or there's some chance that Creationism is the best explanation for man's presents on Earth? Do they believe there's just a slight chance that the Geocentric Model of the Universe is correct?
This seems like a silly way to think, as it is far from reality.
What are your thoughts, or how do you defend this position?
For example this comment is common - "The only absolutes in science are the immutable laws of the universe (and even these aren't 100%). Everything else is probabilities. For most natural science 90-95% is as good as it gets."
So if nothing can be proven false, then is everything considered probable? Do people who believe like this think there's a chance that Alchemists are correct, or there's some chance that Creationism is the best explanation for man's presents on Earth? Do they believe there's just a slight chance that the Geocentric Model of the Universe is correct?
This seems like a silly way to think, as it is far from reality.
What are your thoughts, or how do you defend this position?