Daryl, from a citizen layman's point of view, and very non-scientifically minded person, I still have to make certain decisions in life that involve "belief" in various political and semi-scientific theories. Even I know there are some absolute facts, and some of those absolute facts are used to form more advanced "theories" that are not absolute. Yet, we are asked to evaluate the theories all the time to make decisions.
A few examples are that certain facts, like body counts, go into the theory that if we place even more troops in Iraq, those numbers will eventually go down, and a favorable outcome will follow. I am asked to "vote" for various people that hold that theory, or others who do not. They can look at the facts, of pure number crunching, and come to different conclusions, then act in a socio-political way, depending on "CREDIBILITY"!!!
Now, in this GW debate, there are opposing theories. Some use factual inputs, like what temperature the water melts the ice (not what temp the water boils) and determine the polar ice caps are melting. They show us space photos of the size area of various ice fields and the polar caps and tell us this is supporting evidence. The fact is that the water is melting somewhere north of 32*. But, the theory tells us this is significant and we better craft some policies and decisions on this. Your lot tells us that water boils at 100* is a fact, that so what, that doesn't mean GW is a fact, and that you have a different theory on what decisions we make or what importance in terms of policy and laws we should assign your "scientific findings" based on facts.
There are people that claim they are scientists that say creationisim and intelligent design is fact. But, as a non-scientist citizen layman, non-scientifically minded fellow, I have to make certain decisions based on CREDIBILITY!!! So, it will come as no surprise to you that I would vote for those on a school board that embraced the theory of evolution, because I sense it is better use of science and interpretation of facts than the ADam and Eve'ers.
Most of us are not so stupid to fall for the idea that you have 400 computer "experts" to say the PC under my desk weights 400lbs. I don't care if you claim Bill Gates is among them. Firstly, because you couldn't get any real experts to say something that perposterous, and most people have the inherent ability to deduce a fool from a factual person, most of the time.
So, that consensus that seems to be forming, is evidence to most people that want a chance at a sustainable future, to make decisions based on the more credible theories that use some facts to formulate their estimates of what will happen.
The crowd that pooh-poohs and ridicules the theoretical science on GW are loosing via consensus of a collective mind of citizens that are not scientists. Yet, I have hope that the un-scientific minds will prevail...
UNtil the asteroid hits.... then all bets are off!