Um, Duh.
OK, so I have taken a little blogging hiatus lately. But something always pulls me back. And this is the headline.
Climatologists Baffled by Global Warming Time-Out
None of these climatologists, you know the allegedly smart people telling us if we don’t ruin our economy and revert to hunter gatherer status we are all going to die soon, seem to be willing to revise the hypothesis.
Perhaps global warming is taking a time-out because man-made global warming is a myth. Just this week, in the same source, the United States (well Obama anyhow) was taking heat for not being the leader in reducing carbon emissions. Nevermind the fact that the United States doesn’t have the socialized transportation network that Europe has, or that our culture is different, or that roughly half of American think global warming is a load of crap.
“When the facts change, I change my opinion. What do you do, sir?” – John Maynard Keynes
The philosophy advanced by Keynes is one all scientists should adopt. Indeed, the scientific method requires that scientists adopt theories that are supported by the evidence. When the the evidence no longer supports the theory in question, intellectually honest scientists create a new hypothesis that accounts for all the facts, including those that were the counterexample to the prior hypothesis or theory.
The problem in the global warming arena is that the proponents are dishonest intellectually. They start with the desired conclusion and work backwards to find data to support the conclusions, otherwise known as data mining. Counter evidence is debunked by any manner of logically fallacious argument ,e.g., alleging bias of the groups that perform the counter evidence, attacking the way in which the evidence was gathered, etc. Intellectually honest scientists don’t attack counter evidence, even if they suspect the evidence to be fraudulent. Rather, the seek to verify or refute the findings by trying to reproduce them or improve upon them. This is how science should be done, in the lab, not in the political forum.
The simplest explanation tends to be the correct explanation – Occam’s Razor
Ten years data show a decrease in the temperature of the earth while carbon emissions continue to increase. The global warming hypothesis hold that global temperature increases as man made emissions, particularly carbon dioxide emissions, increase.
However, rather the accept the simplest explanation, which is that the hypothesis linking man-made carbon emission and temperature is incorrect, global warming scientists are evolve ever convoluted theories to account for what seems like a pretty obvious explanation. In an effort to retain the current global warming hypothesis, they continue to tweak the confounding factors in an increasingly into an increasingly complex tangle of arguments supporting their position.
The simplest explanation with respect to the evidence of the last ten years is that there is no correlation between man-made carbon emissions and the temperature of the earth. This is what the data says in its simplest form.
Duh.