Quote:
Originally Posted by Bushrat
What drives me nuts about the followers of the global warming and climate change debate is their blind faith in 'science' and 'scientists' from either side of the arguement.
I have about as much faith in todays scientists as I have for politicians, tv preachers, movie stars or used car salesmen...the vast majority are on the take and are subservient to whoever is writing the check.
Science has been bastardized, paid results are the rule, credible non biased scientific findings are rare, largely ignored, dismissed, ostracized, marginalized and shuttered if they do not follow the benefactors agenda.
|
There is nothing wrong with science however true science means being encouraged to prove a hypothesis wrong. In the climate field if you try to prove anthropomorphic global warming doesn’t exist or isn’t significant you get blackballed by colleagues and refused grants. The peer pressure is tremendous to add anything to a study that references nasty people warming the earth.
Then one delves deeper to find that most “studies” are what if studies or computer models. Computer models can be proved wrong over time… however researchers run a million simulations to find another that fits the new narrative.
The what if studies are frustrating. What if the earth warmed and water levels rose a meter. What if global warming caused a nation wide drought in Canada.
Science can say a measles vaccination prevents measles. It’s easily tested and proved right or wrong. They can track a billion people over the past 50 years. But studies that say driving a car will kill our grand kids can’t be proven. Beware any “study” which is worded to drive emotion versus science.