This week's Nature has an interesting editorial on climate debate. Another important story of the week is about the Himalayan Glaciers. So what is the truth? How much to believe all the climate talks?
Like any other field of science, climate science, also has its own doubts and imperfections. This piece in Nature is worth reading.
Science is incremental. Any hot field of science goes through rigorous debate before it is settled. This process is important for validitation of any scientific hypothesis. As far as I understand, there is enough scientific data to support that climate changes is indeed taking place.
How much of this is human originated and how much of this change is based on other factors could be debatable. Also, the time line of these changes can also be debatable as most of these time-lines are based on simplified mathematical models. As more and more data will come, these things will be more clear. These imperfections only shows that this field of science is very active and needs more research and support from people and governments. This link is an excellent read for everyone.
Meanwhile, it doesn't hurt if we all try to do whatever we can to reduce our impact on the climate. I think the most positive aspect of climate debate is that it made people aware of their own imprints. I hope that all the prediction of melting of Himalayan Glaciers are wrong, but I also hope that people become more aware and use the natural resources wisely. This will be perfect outcome of imperfect scientific endeavor.