On Sat, Feb 01, 2003 at 07:15:29AM -0800, Jonathan Walther wrote:
On Sat, Feb 01, 2003 at 09:45:18AM -0500, The Cunctator wrote:
I have to rise to Ed's defense. I have only seen Ed trying to make sure all sides of the story are represented. Presenting global warming as a scientifically proven "fact" is disengenous, dishonest, and unethical. It is a popular theory, yes. But it is also a controversial one. I have every confidence in Ed's neutrality.
Anthropogenic global warming, by the standard scientific definition of "fact", is a fact.
You didn't read the two URL's I cited, did you.
And you appartently don't know what the standard scientific definition of fact is.
And your "fact" is debatable. Indeed, myself and many others do debate it.
Everything is debatable. Wikipedia is not a discussion forum for scientific discussions. It is an encyclopedia and as such should reflect the current thinking on issues that is shared by most experts on the subject in the world. So if you want that global warming is not presented as fact then you have to convince the others that this is the opinion of a large majority of the experts. The two URLs you provided are certainly not enough for that.
-- Jan Hidders