compassionategirl wrote: this topic we are discussing about science versus law is interesting to me.
It's interesting to me too. Fall 05 I was taking 5 law classes. Spring 06 I'm taking 6 math/science/engineering classes. It's like night and day. CG I'm glad there are people like you out there who can handle the flood of legal education and then go out and do something constructive in the world with it. Legal education nearly made my brain explode. It made me feel like the synapses up there were turning into mush.
compassionategirl wrote:But I still dont get that though. For example, with global warming. Is there not a "right" or "wrong", black and white answer to the question of global warming and which gasses cause it? Why is this debatable? How can it be debatable? I dont get it. Wouldnt that be like saying that it is debatable that hydrogen plus oxygen = water?
Some things are well accepted about it. The Earth's average temperature has risen slightly over a half degree Celsius over the past 100 years. Humans have had an impact on this. Some activities that humans do make the Earth warmer, and some activities we do make the Earth cooler. But the Earth also goes through colder and warmer periods on its own, without human intervention. Mainly what people debate is how much of an effect human activity has had on the rise in temperature vs. how much the temperature would be changing on its own regardless of human intervention.