Scientific Experts:







The actual process of legal or scientific reasoning often probes the ambiguous and complex nature of the item under investigation. In general, neither discipline tolerates complexity very well. Both a scientist and a judge ultimately have to ejudicate the EVIDENCE (but that evidence may be both biased and incomplete).



The role of Bias:









But this is precisely the role that science plays here, searching (testing) for "disconfirming" evidence. The fact that science should proceed along the lines of empirical falsifaction, while historically championed as the way science should work, seldom works that way in the real world. In general, a scientist is rewarded for practicing confirmation bias







This is exactly the problem with Climate Change as a Legal Matter; all of the evidence is not in, and much of the research involves confirmation bias