In a world where 90% of scientists just assume that science works like a religion, a 96%-4% consensus is not a good indicator for implementing policy, it’s an indicator that the few real scientists are almost evenly split on the correct solution.
Why would that cause a 96%-4% split and not a 60%-40% split?
In an Aristotelian framework, dropping 3 very heavy and well-lackered balls towards Earth and seeing they fall with a constant speed barring any wind is enough to say
Why would that cause a 96%-4% split and not a 60%-40% split?
You mean increasing speed?
I meant to say the same speed, but yes, point taken.