Climate records tumble again, page-92

  1. 4,504 Posts.
    lightbulb Created with Sketch. 112
    Mate, I can see you're lost, or missing the point entirely. But I'll describe the principle in a simpler manner:

    (i) Something was falling short of expert theoretical prediction or generally held truth.

    (ii) Experts, believing their theory to be infallible (because they're experts) and the truth to be the truth, simply had to come up with an explanation for the shortfall.

    (iii) Never mind that the explanation, given adamantly, was unsubstantiated; this would be sufficient enough for these experts to show the theory still held true.

    (iv) Even a simple, honest "We just can't explain it - maybe, just maybe, our theory is wrong" from these experts at the time would never suffice.

    This exact scenario happened in the past. Scholars, studying meticulous records of flooding of the Nile that the ancient Egyptians kept, could never understand why there was nothing special in the water level readings taken around the time of the Great Flood, as they had read in the Bible. And of course, everyone knew Noah's flood to be the truth.

    So the scholars' only conclusion: The Egyptians must have lied.

    Mate, the parallels between the "expert" Egyptian scholars with their claim of "missing flood water", and the "expert" climate scientists with their claim of "missing heat" should now be obvious to you.
 
arrow-down-2 Created with Sketch. arrow-down-2 Created with Sketch.