An interesting op-ed comparing the “Yellow journalism of Randolph Hearst and Joseph Pulitzer and the abuse of the scientific method by scientists promoting global warming.
The reality is:
over the past several decades an increasing number of scientists have shed the restraints imposed by the scientific method and begun to proclaim the truth of man-made global warming. This is a hypothesis that remains untested, makes no predictions that can be tested in the near future, and cannot offer a numerical explanation for the limited evidence to which it clings. No equations have been shown to explain the relationship between fossil-fuel emission and global temperature. The only predictions that have been made are apocalyptic, so the hypothesis has to be accepted before it can be tested.
Correct. Go on
The only evidence that can be said to support this so-called scientific consensus is the supposed correlation of historical global temperatures with historical carbon-dioxide content in the atmosphere. Even if we do not question the accuracy of our estimates of global temperatures into previous centuries, and even if we ignore the falling global temperatures over the past decade as fossil-fuel emissions have continued to increase, an honest scientist would still have to admit that the hypothesis of man-made global warming hardly rises to the level of “an assertion of what has been or would be the result of carrying out a specified observational procedure.” Global warming may or may not be “the greatest scam in history,” as it was recently called by John Coleman, a prominent meteorologist and the founder of the Weather Channel. Certainly, however, under the scientific method it does not rise to the level of an “item of physical knowledge.”
As I’ve noted before, one of the key scary aspects of the behaviour of Global Warming scientists has been the total collapse of scientific ethics in regard to reporting results.
Surely Joe Six-Pack should not be expected to monitor the findings of research physicists; if anything is to be done about this collapse of scientific standards, it must be done by the scientific community itself. Unfortunately, history has shown the inability of professional communities to police their own ranks.
And that’s the truth. One of the things that nagged me about the Republican Congress that was, was its complete inability to enforce its own laws on scientific reporting for government-paid scientists (like James Hansen) or the massive funding given to scientists who promoted global warming as a human-made global catastrophe.
Bad Behavior has blocked 29 access attempts in the last 7 days.
2 comments ↓
How right you are. This disgraceful statement was the response of the President of the Royal Society to a TV programme pointing out some . . er . . discrepancies in the cited “scientific” evidence used by the warmists.
Dear Sirs,
Carbon emissions have no discernable effect on climate, but our gullibility nets promoters of this “crisis” billions per year. Meanwhile they change nothing of their own lifestyles, though they also live on the planet they claim we are destroying. Claiming to want to save us from our folly, they seek to strip away our freedoms while destroying our economy. While the climate itself mocks their so-called linkages, and our economy is already on the edge of collapse, a Democratic Congress is still pushing for carbon cap legislation. What will it take to bring this farce to an end?
Your website leads me to believe we share the concerns about this attempt to sell out our country for profit and power. Would you help me promote a book I have written examining this hoax? It is intended to make readers angry over being played for patsies. If enough people read it, it would create a public backlash against that legislation, but through my own efforts, I have been unable to sufficiently publicize this work. Would you also pass this e-mail on to all your peers you think might agree and help?
The book is entitled “A Climate Crisis a la Gore” and is organized as follows:
• Introduction – the motivation behind the assembly of this information for public use.
• Part 1 – Excerpted ideas from Mr. Gore’s book, The Assault on Reason. regarding the proper and reasonable way to enter an argument or evidence are used to critique his film, where apparently he used all the assault techniques he claims to deplore
• Part 2 – A claim by claim analysis of Mr. Gore’s documentary, An Inconvenient Truth. These are evaluated with simple logic, claims elsewhere in the documentary; Mr. Gore’s excerpted written principles of reasoning, and scientific research and findings regarding the subjects of his claims.
• Part 3 – A rather cynical discussion and disclosure of players and special interest groups creating the perception of a global climate crisis. The history of the movement is examined, motives behind involvement, dollar amounts of profit already being reaped by promoters, and what they stand to gain if America enacts carbon legislation.
• Conclusion – The coming economic storm resulting from enacting this legislation and a plea to readers to contact legislators demanding such laws be reconsidered.
Excerpts can be reviewed and the book ordered at Amazon.com by entering the title or ISBN# (978-1-4196-8684-9) If you are willing to inform your readers of its contents and availability, an informed (and angry) population of voters might be a real, and maybe the only, check and balance system capable of stopping Congress.
Sincerely,
Paul Spite
Leave a Comment