A scientist is studying the effect of glaciers on climate and feels that the melting of ice caps has produced global climate change. A climatologist says that global warming is not a problem with far-reaching consequences. An oceanographer feels that it is possible to build a giant machine to combat consequences of global warming. Which of these is the most likely reason the three scientists have different opinions on the consequences of global warming?

Question

ashy98 · Answer

A.) They study different areas of science and have different scientific focuses.
B.) They did not discuss the issue among themselves.
C.) They do not have enough knowledge on the topic.
D.) They believe conflicting opinion strengthens science.
@jondskates666

anonymous · Answer

They all talk about global warming in a different view.
Scientist is discussing the cause of it.
Climatologist is discussing the effect of it.
Oceanographer is discussing the solutions of it.

They never even talk about it together.

anonymous · Answer

A because one is saying how to improve while the other is saying the effects