Fastest temperature decline on RECORD, page-183

First 183 Last

Share
Profile

Follow
tristanc

6,398 Posts.

9

07/02/17

18:26

Post #: 22436087
Share

Originally posted by Sky Cuddles ↑

T, this fine scientist challenged the procedures. I recall that this is the core of what goes on at every university seminar, conference, higher education thesis and every scientific institute I have read about. If management in the climate change science cannot abide by this custom them who would ever get the chance to put checks in. And because they call the shots we expect some moral and ethical standards to be displayed.

Was it then, morally or ethically feasible to rush a report out to Paris 2015 with the thought to keep the message running hot; for politicians to keep their eye on supplying funds to the cause? Since that is clearly, at least, part of their motivation when the "pause" was ripe (was it the MET in the UK who stated the pause was observable?). However, it doesn't just stay at State level. IMO I see it as a pervasive message one aimed to entrenched our society with an unfounded philosophy (rings the church bells). It will stay unfounded, of course, since they look for proof with poorly performing models! This last bit is similar to certain mathematical dilemmas that have stayed unanswered; one that springs to mind is the Riemann's hypothesis and prime numbers. Many have tried and one solution is effectively to use brute force and simply check every prime number. The Bell computer's calculations are around a prime in the 10⁴³ when I last checked. Sort of blundering along and that is comparable to how we fund the climate change industry. I want a proof please.

Expand

Yeah, um... science doesn't deal in proof. That's actually one of the defining features of the scientific method. In a fully self-contained system like maths true proof is possible. Out in the real world, it's not. All you get are varying levels of confidence.
Upvote

Reply