Scietists speak with forked tongue

Do not even attempt to tell me that science is consistent. Two articles that directly contradict each other and both are reported as fact.

Life on Titan? The article says that there is a chemical change in the atmosphere of the giant moon Titan, they then say that, "Scientific conservatism suggests that a biological explanation should be the last choice after all non-biological explanations are addressed."

Scientists claim that we have entered a new age where human activity will determine the planets evolution.

I want to make sure I understand what they are saying. If there are changes to gasses in the atmosphere of the earth it is caused by humans; but, if there are changes in the atmosphere of other planets and moons we should assume it is a natural process. Huh? What happened to scientific process where you start with the same base?

If you read the second article again you will notice that they say that we haven't seen these carbon levels on earth in 800,000 years; but, we have seen them before so it can be a natural occurrence. The question is how much of the carbon levels in the atmosphere are due to the volcanoes that exploded in the last couple of years and the numerous fires in the United States and Greece.

Maybe driving cars changes the temperature and maybe it doesn't; but, the arguments that is does are bad science. What percentage of the change over the past 50 years was due to sun spot activity and how closely does our climate heating match the fact that the other planets in the solar system also increased their temperatures?

The methods being employed by people claiming global warming is man made are dubious, constant repetition of slogans is propaganda not proof. We are being asked to change all of our living habits and not question why. People who do question, even well renowned scientists, are ridiculed. Ridicule and propaganda, what are they hiding? If this is so critical than we should have full disclosure and serious discussion. If they were truly concerned they would actively seek out dissent to convince them, not ridicule them.