Why is climate-change the only topic where "the jury is still out"?
Only 97% of climate-scientists come to the conclusion that climate-change exists AND is man-made AND is dangerous. That means, we shouldn't jump to conclusions. It's 97%. They aren't 100% sure. The jury is still out.
No abortions after 20th week because fetuses feel pain after that. Who says so? Well, no medical doctor says that, so the jury is still out. Except it doesn't count that the jury is still out and politicians legislate as if it's a fact.
Kids need a mother-figure and a father-figure in their life. Psychologists have no data to support that, so the jury is still out. Except it doesn't count that the jury is still out and bigots make their claims anyways.
Big banks make recommendations all the time what economic policies should be like. But you wouldn't THE F**K believe how much in financial theory is based on guess-work and financial theories that have already been proven wrong. (They keep them around anyways because of tradition and because they would have to admit to being fallible. And because having a wrong theory is better than having no theory at all.) So, the jury is still out when it comes to what the best economic policies are. Except it doesn't count that the jury is still out and Big Money still counts as the wise guys.
(Saudi-Arabia recently hired the financial consulting-company McKinsey. McKinsey's recommendations were the usual "cut-government-spending"-stuff with no connection to the specifics of Saudi-Arabia's economy. Yet they were well-received.)
http://www.salon.com/2016/05/06/saudia_arabia_is_in_serious_trouble_americas_partner/
Countries with less guns have less gun-violence than the US. And comparable countries with a comparable level of guns, like Switzerland, also less gun-violence. There are no systematic studies on gun-violence in the US, so the jury is still out. Except it doesn't count that the jury is still out and the only acceptable recommendation is "more guns".
= new reply since forum marked as read
