Quote:
|
When it comes to something so scientific and controversial, I'll want real data from researchers... The facts in the article might even be correct, but there's no guaruntee there aren't omissions. For this argument, I'll stick to peer-reviewed print.
|
Agreed. And 'peer-reviewed' is a good filter...but I would offer this as a consideration:
Even the most thoroughly researched reports have to be synthesised down from massive amounts of data (previous work, experimental results and analyses, background research, conceptual research, etc) - there is a risk of (potentially important) omissions...
The collective body of evidence (which does include 'oral histories' or 'folk wisdom', as well as 'real-time' measurements, ice and sediment cores, the geological record...- or, more precisely, the consensual interpretation thereof) does indicate that average temperatures are rising...
Whether the current rise is part of a 'short cycle', 'medium cycle', 'long cycle', 'super cycle', or unprecedented...remains unanswered to my satisfaction <_<
So, yes...more research...more facts and analyses...more...more!
