Replies

It is all well and good to flame and blame OTHERS over THEIR lack of testing a speculation such as the junk science “Global” Warming Speculation.

What we Scientists need to do is to first look at ourselves, and examine what our so-called “tests” are the WE use in the published literature.

IMHO, over 90 % of our published “tests” fall within one of the following methods of testing:
1.) The Null Hypothesis;
2.) Statistical Inference/Correlation;
3.) Acceptance of the preponderance of “expert” scientific opinion.

Also IMHO, it is very rare to read in high quality Scientific Journals, such as ‘Nature,’ an article that tests an idea by the use of the Cause and Effect Method.

Observation is the first step, speculation is the second step, and here comes the fork in the road: “Is there a Cause and Effect between two chosen and independent variables?”

Over 90 % of published Scientists take the easy way out and use one or more of the above non Cause and Effect “tests.”

The History of Science is replete with examples of long-held, well-accepted theories being proven to be false.

As Scientists, our duty is to prove our ideas to be false. Failing that we are duty bound to ask our peers to prove our ideas to be false.

If they also fail, after multiple tests, then begrudgingly the more foolish among us will admit that the idea MIGHT be more correct than false.

In the back of every Scientist’s mind is this doubt: “The true reality is probably ‘None of the above.’ “

As far as I know, there is NO known, and commonly peer repeated Cause and Effect between the concentration of CO2 and variation of Heat Energy in Ocean Water, or the Atmosphere of the Earth.

Thus, IMHO, the “Global” Warming Speculation remains as a Speculation, and not an Hypothesis, and not even close to being elevated to the very high status of a Theory.

I challenge any and all to refute anything that I have posted in this comment.

What say all of you?

BTW, a fossil Polar Bear skull was recently found in Norway and age-dated at 135,000 years BP - - - - .

FYI: The 105,000 BPY Sangamon Interglacial was a LOT warmer than 5,000 YBP, which was itself warmer than the Medieval Warm period or the temperatures of today.

(Yup, we have been is a sawtooth, downward trending time of Global Cooling for over 5,000 years. Deal with it)!

BTW, BTW, most business people are better Scientists than are many published Scientists, because businesses use the Cause and Effect Method every day. They however call it “Profit and Loss.”