Environmental scientists rarely look back to see if their old forecasts were accurate and in some instances they offer such long-term predictions that we will all be dead long before the validity or falsehood of their calculations is established. In the 1970s scientists warned that a nuclear war, large meteorite strike or series of big volcanic eruptions could trigger a cooling of the world and the dawn of a new ice age. In the 1980s they warned of a recently discovered hole in the ozone layer and of the catastrophic effects that would follow if it was to grow. Today scientists link the burning of fossil fuels to increased concentrations of carbon dioxide and predict that the ice sheets of Antarctica will melt within 1,000 years, causing sea levels to rise six metres, drowning vast tracts of land and whole communities. These predictions are alarming, newsworthy and influence public behaviour but given that in practice they are not verified or impossible to verify we must question if are they based on good scientific methods.

Question: The passage is written from the standpoint that foretelling the future is difficult and when people try to do it they are nearly always wrong.
Options:
A. true, B. false, C. uncertain
Answer: "B"