A central issue
in climate science,
is whether
human emissions
of carbon dioxide,
methane, and other
“greenhouse gases”,
are having effects
on Earth’s atmosphere,
that could endanger life
on this planet.
Climate science
is a complex subject
with a lot of
unanswered questions.
Simplistic claims
about the relationship
between human activity
and climate change
are jumping to conclusions.
People claiming
to be climate scientists
are usually specialists
in one or a few areas
including physics,
mathematics,
computer modeling,
oceanography,
meteorology, etc.,
who study just one part
of the complex climate.
Some physicists
doubt whether
the concept
of a single
global temperature
should be used
in climate research .
Science is a search
for causal explanations
of natural events.
Skepticism
is at the heart
of science.
The Scientific Method
is a series
of requirements
imposed on scientists
to ensure the integrity
of their work.
The IPCC has not followed
established rules that guide
scientific research.
Scientific theories
differ from observations
by being suppositions
about what is not
observable directly.
According to Popper (1965),
a theory is scientific
only if it can be falsified
by observational data
or experimentation.
The best we can do
is trying to
falsify the hypothesis,
and by surviving such tests
a hypothesis demonstrates
it may be close to the truth.
It is relatively easy
to assemble
reams of “evidence”
in favor of
a point of view
or opinion
while ignoring
inconvenient facts
that would contradict it --
a phenomenon called
“confirmation bias”.
The hypothesis implicit
in the IPCC’s writings,
though rarely
explicitly stated,
is that dangerous
global warming
is resulting, or will result,
from human-related
greenhouse gas emissions.
But there must be
direct evidence
of human causation
of changes in temperature,
or other elements of climate,
that lie outside of
natural climate variability.
But the IPCC and other
research and advocacy groups
make no effort to find
that direct evidence.
In addition, virtually
no research dollars
are available to study
the causes
and consequences
of natural climate
variability.
Instead,
IPCC researchers
try to refute
any theory or data
that might
compromise
their own
'CO2 is Evil" theory.
Many science journals
refuse to even consider
publishing articles
that question the
IPCC's unproven claims.
The geological record
reveals that we live on
a dynamic planet.
It is wrong to assume
no climate changes
would occur
in the absence of
humans.
Climate will
be different
in 100 years
regardless
of what
humans do.
Appealing to
a consensus
does not have
a place in science,
especially as
a strategy
to shut down debate.
Climate is always changing.
To say climate change
is “man-made”
begs the questions:
“how much?”, and
“how do we know?”
No one knows how much.
The idea that the science
of climate change is ‘settled’
is an absurdity !
Climate science is in its infancy.
Uncertainties abound
in climate science.
For one example,
the amount of energy
reflected back into space
by clouds is assumed to be
(on average) a constant,
but even small changes
in cloud cover,
cloud brightness, and
cloud height
– all of which are known
to vary -- can change
the average temperature.