Siteadmin, Check users, nsTeam1RO, nsTeam1RW, nsTeam1_talkRO, nsTeam1_talkRW, oversight, Administrators
30,650
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 1:
Line 1: − + − + + + +
It's not always "bad" and it's not only liberals who abuse it
'''Scientific consensus''', in the context of political debates, is a supposedly broadbased agreement about a scientific theory - regardless of whether there is any actual scientific evidence for or against it. The term is often used by liberals to completely shut down any and all dissent from select theories and to prevent alternate theories from being researched or even simply presented.
'''Scientific consensus''', is a broadbased agreement about a scientific theory.
The best known modern examples of consensus science are that of biologists favoring Darwin's [[Theory of evolution]] and the [[environmentalist]] faith in [[Anthropogenic global warming]].
But in the context of political debates, scientific consensus for a theory has frequently been claimed without regard to
whether there is any actual [[scientific evidence]] for or against it. The claim is then used by powerful political forces to completely shut down any and all dissent from select theories and to prevent alternate theories from being researched or even simply presented.
The best known liberal examples of consensus science are that of biologists favoring Darwin's [[Theory of evolution]] and the [[environmentalist]] faith in [[Anthropogenic global warming]].
[[MIT]] Climate scientist [[Richard Lindzen]] wrote:
[[MIT]] Climate scientist [[Richard Lindzen]] wrote: