climate science
2 responses | 0 likes
Started by bear - April 2, 2021, 11:39 p.m.

here is a different twist on science and climate.

at the local college, i have often engaged professors on this discussion. (especially the ones who teach courses that deal with climate). 

can you give me a thorough discussion of mill's methods?  

can you give me a detailed discussion of which of mill's methods are used in studies on climate?  

what are the different types of methodology, and which might be preferrable to study climate?

what would a controlled study look like?  what would be your control group?  

remember, even scientists have a tendency to find what they are looking for,  whether it is there or not.  

of course None of the people who claim to be experts on climate can answer these questions.  they also seem somewhat dumbfounded.  and i then remind them that the science (on climate) is Not a settled issue, since they cannot even give me a good discussion about methodology.   usually they walk away perplexed.  

By metmike - April 3, 2021, 7:54 p.m.
Like Reply

Thanks much bear!

This is not about science or the scientific method.

The authentic science totally supports the side that insists that we don't have a crisis.

At the very least, the scientific method compels the scientist to prove to themselves that their theory is correct by being unable to prove it wrong.

There are thousands of different authentic scientific facts and evidence that show that we are having a climate optimum, not a crisis. It would be one thing to consider it as very plausable but to completely ignore all of it and say its a climate crisis................then make it final with  "the science is settled" and all the real scientists agree is the opposite of the scientific method and authentic science.

People like me, atmospheric scientists with almost 4 decades of observing and analyzing weather/climate objectively having data and interpretations based entirely on the authentic evidence................being censored from mainstream science because mainstream science is NOT authentic science.

It's entirely politics.

                Brilliant  assessment of reality!            

                            Started by metmike - April 2, 2021, 1:26 p.m.     

By metmike - April 3, 2021, 7:56 p.m.
Like Reply

This defines many things in our world today!

To win the case for political agenda.

  1. Make up a very convincing sounding narrative. Tell people that it's for altruistic cause X or cause Y...........saving the planet is one of the best. Who could be against that? (other than deniers trying to sabotage your effort and big oil wrecking the planet for selfish financial gains).
  2. Tell them that it's based on the science and that all the real scientists universally agree on it. Those that disagree are conspiracy theorists or have evil motives. 
  3. Repeat it over and over and over....for decades in this case. 
  4. Don't let observations or contradictions get in the way with reality.  Effectively censor sources that have authentic data/evidence that contradicts your message. If they get loose with a message that's picked up and gains traction........ smear them based on #2.
  5. Ex-KGB on Ideological Subversion: How the UN/IPCC hijacked science/brainwashed the world. Previously warmer. Polar bear hoax. Sept. 2019