I edited the following post in case the "not like religious doctrine" part was what caused this thread to be locked:
"Actually, to rephrase: science is not like religious doctrine. It is possible for an old hypothesis to be proven incorrect without us throwing all climate science out the window because some people in the 60's talked about climate cooling.
EDIT: By "science is not like religious doctrine" , I mean that it is not set in stone in that the term "science" in this context is generally understood as being "scientific consensus." Scientific consensus can evolve and change over time even to the point of completely disproving former scientific consensus.
One cannot use a mistake in the past (the global cooling hypothesis) to disprove today's hypothesis of global climate change. For one, we have come a long way from a technological perspective. More importantly though, "the global cooling hypothesis" was NOT a scientific consensus. The Global climate change hypothesis IS a scientific consensus.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_opinion_on_climate_change#Scientific_consensus"
