Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: pepsionice

By its very nature, there cannot ever be something that could be honestly called “settled science”.

The Oxford English Dictionary defines the scientific method as “a method or procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses.” The best hypotheses lead to predictions that can be tested in various ways, including making further observations about nature. In general, the strongest tests of hypotheses come from carefully controlled and replicated experiments that gather empirical data. Depending on how well the tests match the predictions, the original hypothesis may require refinement, alteration, expansion or even rejection. If a particular hypothesis becomes very well supported a general theory may be developed.

The “climate scientists” have run roughshod over this process, first constructing a conclusion, THEN going back and trying to fit highly selective facts to the conclusion. By ignoring some, or even much, of the data observed, and applying something called “the finagle factor”, Voila! - the “right” answer comes out. This is the method of the charlatans and the snake-oil salesmen, and has as much to do with true science, as long philosophical arguments concerning how many angels may dance upon the point of a pin.

At this point, they are just talking out their rectal orifices.


4 posted on 01/16/2016 2:06:20 AM PST by alloysteel (If I considered the consequences of my actions, I would rarely do anything.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]


To: alloysteel

There is some ‘settled science’. Like the spectrum of hydrogen for instance. The red shift of distant galaxies, the speed of like in a vacuum..

But climate ‘science’ is far from settled because it can be used to justify anything. There’s no ‘observation’, it’s all prediction. And worse, anything that is observed ‘fits’ with the predictions as they are always in flux. We’ve had only a few hundred years of solid weather reports, it leaves out the influence of the sun, and it has other issues.

If a climate scientist said the sea will rise by 5 inches in the next 5 years and it does, then that’s at least something. Right now it’s ‘it may go up or down or neither, but it all fits the model’.


7 posted on 01/16/2016 2:15:07 AM PST by Monty22002
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson