Agroup of scientists believe that global warming is an irreversible process. another group of scientists feel that human intervention can reverse the global warming process. which of these is the most likely outcome of differences in opinions of scientists on the issue of global warming?

all old ideas would be discarded.
scientific evidence would be weakened.
new ideas would be created and tested.
the limitations of science would be evident.

C

Explanation:

Whenever researchers have conflicting opinions, they test their own hypothesis first to ensure it is possible. If neither options are possible then they simply create new ones.

The correct answer will be option-New ideas would be created and tested.

Explanation:

The scientists use the scientific method to answer and explain any scientific question based on observations. These explanations must be verified with the peer review fellow scientists on the basis of which a consensus is established.

If two group of scientists on the same issue proposes different or contradictory explanations, then the groups should form new hypothesis to explain the phenomenon.  

In the given question, the opinions of the two groups on global warming disagree with each other's explanations. These issues should be handled by forming a new hypothesis which could be tested again to reach a conclusion.

Thus, the selected option is the correct answer.

nucleus

would be most reasonable answer tbh