Quote:
Originally Posted by WarChild
It's very cute that you don't understand how Science works, but it leaves you kind of in the dark in discussions like this.
You see, comparing scientists to priests just illustrates that point beautifully.
There are all sorts of areas of climatology that people study and publish actual, real papers about that their peers then review. Much of the subject matter doesn't address man made global warming at all. Rather it's discussions about how systems work. Think of it like Astronomy. Most people aren't trying to explain why the universe is expanding. Lots of material is about moons, and stars and black holes and all kinds of other features of space beyond Earth. The same is true of climatology. Suggesting that a climatologist can ONLY write papers about man made climate change or they will otherwise be out of a job is absurd.
Finally, scientists love to prove established theories wrong. If anybody could concretely disprove man made climate change, they would be a hero in the community. Their works and findings would be published far and wide making them a scientific rock star! Alas, not only has nobody disproved it, but all but 1 were in support across the papers published specifically dealing with man made climate change over the last year.
|
I don't agree...
climate "science" is pretty damn close to religion... with any other science, you make a hypothesis, do some tests, get results, tweak it, retest, etc... and any results can easily be verified by your peers...
with climate science on the other hand, you look at perhaps 100 years worth of data, make up some assumptions, make up a model and try to understand how climate changed over millions of years... and on top of that you try to predict what will happen over the next million years...
so you basically have free reign to make shit up, as there is no possibility to verify if either your assumptions are true, or if your predictions are true...
all these climate "scientists" are barely able to predict if it will rain next weekend or not... and yet you expect them to predict temperature on earth in 1000 years?
I'm not saying that there is nothing to it, but it's far from a solid science... and with strong financial motivation to keep "global warming" hypothesis going, we need to take what these "studies" conclude with a grain of salt...
