by Greg Slack

Created on: March 09, 2010   Last Updated: March 10, 2010

Well that would depend on what you call a consensus, and what constitutes a consensus. These days it seems the selling of a scientific consensus on climate change negates whether or not it is true or factual. The climategate scandal alone gives a mountain of evidence against any such consensus. How can there be a real consensus among scientists when they themselves have shown a marked tendency to alter and misrepresent data and findings?

A real scientist does not care for consensus, his desire is truth. Truth regardless of prejudice, preconceptions, or any predetermined outcome should be the goal of any true scientist.

Consensus is neither a goal nor evidence of truth, it is a shared opinion. And that is not my take on it, it's the heart of any scientific process.

A couple of hundred years ago there was a consensus amongst scientists that the Sun rotated around the Earth. These were the most educated and brilliant minds of their time, and they were quite sure of this.

Yet it took one person (Nicholas Copernicus) to propose the Sun as the center of the star system and the planets revolved around it. It took years for this concept to replace their so-called scientific consensus and many other great minds to make it factual and true.

Copernicus cared nothing for consensus, he wanted truth and knowledge. This should be the desire of any scientist yet the mainstream media and many of our own politicians would like change that, at least in the eyes of the people.

A great many Meteorologists, Climatologists, and researchers in related fields have contributed vast amounts of evidence against the current popular climate change theories and the conclusions that come from it. For this they have been vilified by the media and often times stood up to ridicule by elected officials.

Claims that they are working for corporations, that they are insane, that they practice unsound methods are thrown at them for simply being scientists and doing what they are supposed to do.

The fact is all research takes money, and all researchers get that money the same ways. They find groups, governments or individuals who either want to further the knowledge in that particular discipline, or desire (for whatever reason) the fruits such knowledge can bring them.

So in reality all science is funded, and all research has its benefactors. For any body to claim one bias they in essence proclaim all research bias, thereby negating any claim to superiority over another.

Is a scientific study more

• 1
• 2
• Next Page >>