Why do the scientific community and the public have different views about the nature and validity of global climate change

457). These developments seemingly established the presence of several defects in climate science.
Moreover, in the initial stages, the media was given to quoting scientists, with respect to global warming. As such, scientists were deemed to be the primary sources of such information. Subsequently, the media resorted to quoting politicians, interests groups and other entities who had a vested interest in the ramifications of this issue (Durfee &amp. Corbett, 2005, p. 88). The media, with its penchant for sensationalism, had preferred to promote the view that there was considerable uncertainty regarding global warming.
Furthermore, a small section of scientists disagree with the mainstream scientific evaluation regarding global warming. These individuals entertain various opinions regarding the cause behind this phenomenon. Some of these scientists declare that it has not been determined whether the primary cause of global warming is human activity (Haldar, 2010, p. 140). On the other hand, there are a few scientists who ascribe global warming to increased solar activity, cosmic rays, natural variation, ocean currents, or unidentified natural causes (Haldar, 2010, p. 141).
Nevertheless, some of the studies on global warming have contended that the contemporary level of solar activity is at a maximum. This has been conjectured on the basis of sunspot activity and other factors. The Sun’s output can vary, on account of solar activity. Researchers, such as Solanki have held that solar activity for the past 6 to 7 decades could have been the greatest in eight millennia (Haldar, 2010, p. 141). However, they have declared that solar activity is not a significant contributor to the contemporary global warming.
In addition, modern science presents its results as probabilistic and statistical data. Thus, there is no certainty, and this increases with the complexity of the phenomena being considered. A