|
|
I'm not a 'denialist' - and am quite happy for Carbon taxes etc to be imposed.
However that doesn't and shouldn't excuse bad science - and that was what was demonstrated on Newsnight. Two different bottles filled with different gases, held different distances from different light bulbs, with different temperature probes does not make for good science.
Had forums been around when Fleishman and Pons were appearing on TV, you'd have heard me criticizing them . In a similar way Creationists who try to invoke the second law of thermodynamics, also get short shrift.
It's the absolutes that get talked about with climate science (which after all is the study of a complex system) that annoy me into commenting. Not necessarily the predictions. I hope you can see the difference.
Other sciences, don't, outside of cell biology, have the same level of complexities to cope with - and many of them are dealing with 'testable' science anyway. Climatatologists on the other hand are dealing with a diverse, incredibly complex system, the science of which remains unverifiable beyond the limited scope of a computer model, or waiting 50 years to see what happens.
Show us the results of the modelling, and tell us the hypothesis, report the trends and show us the data, but please don't state what's going to happen like it's a racing certainty. |
|
Author: leedswillprevai
26-11-2019 04:30:58
