Science "says" nothing. People say things and knowledge changes.
[Science is] the literature of truth.
In science, 'fact' can only mean 'confirmed to such a degree that it would be perverse to withhold provisional assent.' I suppose that apples might start to rise tomorrow, but the possibility does not merit equal time in physics classrooms.
There is no debate here, just scientists and non-scientists. And since the subject is science, the non-scientists don't get a vote.
It is not so much that I have confidence in scientists being right, but that I have so much in nonscientists being wrong.
Only when he has published his ideas and findings has the scientist made his contribution, and only when he has thus made it part of the public domain of scholarship can he truly lay claim to it as his own. For his claim resides only in the recognition accorded by peers in the social system of science through reference to his work.
You can only utter things proved by science. Do you realize that would shut down the entire climate change community? Because none of it is provable by science. Don't tell them that, but none of it is yet.
Consensus is invoked only in situations where the science is not solid enough.
