Re: Consensus is not science
Yes the physics of Co2 absorption of heat are known and there is an actual real consensus. But, and here is the big but, Co2 is not the ONLY driver of climate, and one has to think of the old "yes my theory works , but only for the apocryphal spherical chicken in a vacuum". Nearly every prediction made by the models has proved to wrong, and Armageddon (the so called "tipping point" ) has been delayed several years.
I feel sorry for those in the Northern Hemisphere, it looks like its going to get colder - I refer to
Gerard D. McCarthy, Ivan D. Haigh, Joël J.-M. Hirschi, Jeremy P. Grist, David A. Smeed. (2015) Ocean impact on decadal Atlantic climate variability revealed by sea-level observations. Nature; 521 (7553): 508 DOI: 10.1038/nature14491 which refers to the AMO (Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation) which looks like it is entering a cooling phase (hang about - if it is now cooling , could that mean it was warming at one point and was responsible for the warming seen until 1998?)
As for the echo chamber effect, it is assumed by our acquaintances, that because I am a teacher I am progressive, and so my inbox is full of "conservatives are weird/stupid because ..." stuff.
Sadly we are seeing more & more of this at a university level, where instead of healthy debate, and students being exposed to ideas that may offend see the rise of "trigger warnings", that expose them to controversial history (eg the fact that before the US Civil War there were a large number of black slave owners, and the man generally regarded as treating his slaves the worst was black, and an ex-slave to boot) or to the poor thinking of the "idiots' (usually whichever group or person is currently on the end of a twatter storm, or who has incurred the wrath of an NGO) "no platform". Is this because of the paucity of their own argument or the "idiot" actually has a better case ?