Antiseptic,

....Because of that, much of what is written is more akin to theology than science."

Well, I'm sorry to say that that particular sentence sounds like entrenched denier talk.

You won't find any oceanographer, glaciologist, atmospheric physicist, etc claiming that earth's climate is not complicated and there's much we don't know.

However, there is much we do know. People with expertise and real knowledge of how things work are telling us we're indulging in an extremely dangerous experiment.

Don't impugn the work of those scientists who with real dedication and expertise work hard to measure and compare and provide us with "empirical" data, by likening their scientific integrity to that of a theologian.

What a lot of rot, Poirot. The scientists in the field would be the first to tell you they know very little, but my comment had nothing to do with them anyway. Go back and re-read it, it was directed at the non-scientists who spruik an agenda based on bugger all except faith.

My position is clear - do what's easy and research hard, because at the moment we know next to nothing about all the mechanisms involved. I have confidence that science will yield lots of answers - and thus continue to be an strongly influential emergent variable in the interaction of humans with their planet and vice versa.

Fair enough, Anti....you were directing your theological reference in the main to pollies and journalists. Of course, there is a lot of partisan "opinion" involved in that - depending on who your allegiances are with and the ownership of the media outlet.

Anyway, it's pointless arguing this stuff here. The people who could give you more info on what climate scientists know and do not know don't come to places like OLO....anymore.

I find that it helps me to organise my own thinking on a topic like this to try to construct an argument that can be scrutinised and critiqued by others.

I'm not sufficiently pretentious (not this 5 seconds, anyway) to think that my opinion is in any way likely to be worth the attention of anybody working in the field. However, I'm pretty certain that if what I say is either obvious nonsense on the face of it, or assumes things that are known to be wrong, or is simply gobbledegook then someone will point that out. There are obviously lots of people who have made a hobby/obsession/life's work out of keeping up with developments in the research and I am confident they are more than willing to point out my flaws - empirical, rational and sundry other if so moved.

I look forward to learning something.

Ah well, Anti....sorry to be the one to tell you.

But you won't find any scientists around here - especially of the climate variety.

qanda was the last one, and now he's gone.

The reason they don't come is that this isn't a place where scientific discussion can take place. I've watched over the years as a few scientists have tried. They get abused for their trouble by politically partisan "skeptics" with no scientific training.

If you want to learn, you'll have to go further afield than this garden variety forum.

But I wish you luck. You're an intelligent guy and there's lots of stuff our there - even for us laymen.

"But you won't find any scientists around here - especially of the climate variety.

qanda was the last one, and now he's gone."

From q&a's 'scientific' link:

"Any attempt to communicate about possible futures must take account of the
diverse ways in which people share information and opinions. Vivid stories,
movies and the like have the potential to help people experience the future’s
issues now and bring together emotions and beliefs with various forms of
information."

Utter garbage. Just up your alley Poirot; why don't you "Select a drink of your choice, cosy up and click the embedded chapters at your leisure."

q&a a scientist; oxymoron of the thread.