Originally Posted by JCL

But doesn't that go back to the scare tactics referenced above? Why would we want to turn the world upside down? That seems like a polarizing statement to me.

To follow your weather example, some things are self-evident. If it is raining, we tend to carry umbrellas. If there is a good chance of rain, we tend to take umbrellas with us just in case. Just because we don't know for sure whether it is going to be raining in 7 days, doesn't mean that we should ignore the likely or possible outcome.

Regarding man's effect on climate change, we have a large body of scientists in the world today (but apparently not in the US senate or on various news channels) who have a theory. This is not speculation, but a theory consistent with the scientific method of postulating theories which describe the behaviour of natural phenomena, and then testing them logically and with empirical evidence. That theory is increasingly supported by observation, testing, etc. To use a non-scientific approach and describe it as theoretical because not every element is understood basically abandons the scientific method and takes us into a realm where we are unlikely to move forward because we have abandoned the principles of science, where we are searching for 'truth' as if it is somehow superior to a scientific theory.

Takes me back to university courses in philosophy and the history of the scientific method.

To paraphrase MD, my (philosophical) quarter is up. Looking forward to further discussions and observations. I think the topic is valuable enough not to be dismissed, but that is just me.