![]() |
|
#11
|
|||
|
|||
|
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] scientists believe that climate change will occur on human time frames, have postulated a mechanism for such a change, and have methods to relate that mechanism to a result. [/ QUOTE ] Belief has nothing to do with it. You should have started your above statement with: Scientists have substantial evidence that..... -Zeno [/ QUOTE ] this is silly nitpicking (and, furthermore, not even good nitpicking). how about: scientists believe, based on examination of the evidence, that... (which i think was implied in what i wrote) "believe" doesn't always mean assume without evidence. [/ QUOTE ] I disagree. It is neither silly nor nit-picking. The term believe should be avoided in discussions of science because of not only the definition, but mainly because of the connotation and public perception of believe or belief with religious convictions. This is almost universal with most people and empirical evidence is not mentioned in any definition of believe. Good science sometimes consists of being a nitpicker. From Merriam-Webster Dictionary Believe 1 : to have religious convictions 2 : to have a firm conviction about something : accept as true [this does not me it is true] 3 : to hold as an opinion : SUPPOSE -Zeno, Nitpicker [/ QUOTE ] Thanks for posting the definition, of which part 2 completely disproves your point. |
|
|