Climate Policy

[Concillian]

I'm still skeptical, and unwilling in almost all cases to rely on correlation to indicate causality.

circumstantial evidence is reason to be skeptical.

However, when that circumstantial evidence is backed up by a strong scientific explanation which doesn't have to be "bent" in any way to explain that the circumstantial evidence makes sense, the circumstantial evidence moves to extremely compelling.

When the alternative explanation is maybe something in nature changed, so now the scientific theory, which fits pretty much perfectly, is not valid and what we really have is some cosmically improbable coincidence of events to make it look scientifically valid, well then the scientific explanation becomes virtually iron clad. Look at the supporting evidence. For a government to discard all that and bank on all of that being some massive coincidence is irresponsible to the people they are governing.

There is a time to be skeptical, but when the option is strong circumstantial evidence vs. some low probability random chance, my skepticism lies with the low probability random chance. I think you'll find a very small group of informed supporters are on that side of the fence with a larger group of under-informed supporters.