The Real Scientific Method vs. Climate Alarmist Junk Science

The UN's IPCC 
has claimed,

since 1988, 
that dangerous 
global warming 
will result from 

man made 
CO2 emissions.

Contradicting the

scientific method, 

the UN's IPCC 

merely assumes 

its climate claims

are correct.

Then the IPCC collects

ONLY the evidence 

in favor of their assumed 

to be correct hypothesis.

IPCC’s reports are huge, 

but that doesn't make

them good science. 

Real science 
requires a 
falsifiable 
hypothesis 

-- one that can be 

proven wrong.

That does not 
exist in 
government
bureaucrat 
climate
"science".

An alternative 

null hypothesis 

must be considered 
too.

For climate change, 

the null hypothesis is that 

currently observed changes 

in global climate, and the 

physical environment, 

are the result of 

natural variations. 

Proving this 

null hypothesis 

wrong requires 

direct evidence 

that humans 
caused specific 
climate changes 

that could NOT 
be caused by 
natural variations. 

Without that evidence, 

the null hypothesis is 

assumed to be correct.

Science does not advance 

by consensus (popular vote),

or loud scary, always 
wrong predictions.

It advances by individual 

scientists proposing testable 

hypotheses, and making 

their data available to other 

unbiased researchers,

who see if they arrive 

at similar conclusions. 

In real science, 

disagreement 

is common, 

and consensus 

is the exception.

In real science, 

what is accepted 

as true today 

will likely not 

be accepted 

as true

tomorrow. 

Albert Einstein said, 

“No amount 

of experimentation 

can ever prove me right; 

a single experiment 

can prove me wrong” 

(Einstein, 1996).

Contradicting the scientific 

method, the IPCC assumes 

its hypothesis is correct, and 

their only duty is to data mine

for evidence they were right 

all along.

The United Nations 

directions for IPCC 

defined climate change as: 

“a change of climate which is 

attributed directly or indirectly 

to human activity that alters 

the composition of the global 

atmosphere and which is 

in addition to natural climate

variability observed over 

comparable time periods” 

(United Nations, 1994, Article 1.2). 

They were told to prove 

man made climate change, 

so that is all the IPCC 
trys to do.

And never mind the 4.5 billion

years of natural climate change

before 1975 !

By ignoring 
natural climate 
variations,
and merely 
assuming
they are 
too small
to matter,

the IPCC
fails to 
provide 

a thorough 
analysis of 
climate change.