What's a scientist? The problem is not all scientists are created equal, yet many would have us believe that on this issue climitologists are the same as HS physics teachers. Well...they are both scientists.
I'm a scientist and probably know as much or more about the reliability of jet aircraft than anyone on this board. I'm fairly knowledgeble about statistics, since I have been a certified quality engineer and worked as a reliability engineer stating in the early 1990s. I have a fair amount of knowledge about machining and metalorgy but probably less than the majority of gunsmiths. I don't offer opinions on gunsmithing issues since my knowledge while better than the vast majority of folks is not specialised enough for that discussion. I will however debate physics and math with anyone, well not math PHDs they're just weird, but my best friend who has always called me Henry(after henry holyoak Lightcap the original hillbilly redneck philosopher) has a PHD in geo physics and we debate a lot(usually about woodworking). I will also debate soccer with anyone since I have played and coached for several decades now.
My wife is also a scientist, a physician to be exact. She can also debate a myriad of scientific issues with more or less expertise than most. However, only a fool would ever engage her in debate about cytochrome 35something or other metabolites and various nuerotransmitter response to certain chemicals. Just typing it gives me a headache.
There are probably less than a 200 people worldwide who know the science of climate change well enough to render a legitimate opinion on the subject, and all 200 are too busy to be here arguing with us mere mortals. My research has convinced me that at least 95% of these experts are of the same opinion. In any scientific debate you will always get 5-10% who disagree with everyone else.
This is a gun forum with hundreds of people with millions of hours and billions of rounds of experience and yet we are more able to come to a seeming consensus on something as complex as global warming than we are about which .357 is the better self defense round, or if maybe a .38 special +P is better than the .357 in actual application.
So, with all this concrete ballistic information and real world experience this forum can't form a consensus about whether a faster 125grain bullet is more lethal than a slower 158 grain bullet, but we're ready to argue with the guys who have spent their lives studying climate. Give me a break.
There is greater consensus about the extent and cause of global warming than there is about the correct self defense load. Hell, we can't even form a consensus about whether revolvers are better than semi-autos or whether we would all be better off with shotguns. And we want to argue global climate change with experts in the field?