You're ignoring half my message. Certainly we need critical assessments, but whether the sun is centric or the earth (afaik the point galileo contested) isn't going to be life or death for millions. We don't need to gamble on that. We can gamble on cleaner cars being better for us with good confidence.
This is the second half of the first paragraph of my previous message:
> What are the odds that it does more harm to try to reduce emissions to keep a measurable quantity of gas in the atmosphere stable rather than raising it? Could keeping the atmosphere stable do more harm than if we all just assume it'll be fine and carry on filling it up with combustion products?
This is the second half of the first paragraph of my previous message:
> What are the odds that it does more harm to try to reduce emissions to keep a measurable quantity of gas in the atmosphere stable rather than raising it? Could keeping the atmosphere stable do more harm than if we all just assume it'll be fine and carry on filling it up with combustion products?