There's quite a long and miserable history of the scientific establishment refusing to attempt falsification of their pet theories, and in fact covering up when someone outside the field does falsify one. Rather, it's a search for supporting evidence.Professor Johnson, who expressed surprise that the case for global warming was so weak, systematically examined the claims made in IPCC publications and other similar work by leading climate establishment scientists and compared them with what is found in the peer-edited climate science literature. He found that the climate establishment does not follow the scientific method. Instead, it “seems overall to comprise an effort to marshal evidence in favor of a predetermined policy preference.”
The 79-page document, which effectively eviscerates the case for man-made global warming, can be found here.
The Scientific Method, of course, demands a rigorous search for negative evidence - disproof. Our hundred billion dollars of scientific grant funding seems to have bought us nothing more than papers propping up the Government's preferred theory.
I'm shocked. Shocked!
That's some righteous "science" going on, right there, when lawyers bust your theory.
(via)
3 comments:
But the game is no one is allowed to criticize their science unless they are a Climate Modeler (I refuse to use the term Scientist to describe these XBox jockeys). Any other intelligent person from any other background is not Holy enough to criticize them.
They will never accept that a mere lawyer can see through the smokescreen.
That's some righteous "science" going on, right there, when lawyers bust your theory.
What you said. :)
"The Scientific Method, of course, demands a rigorous search for negative evidence - disproof."
That's going to be difficult. You'd have to prove that the earth's temperature will not be 1.2 deg C higher next century.
Post a Comment