[Ed. – The party of ‘science’ has no idea what it’s talking about.]
If you follow closely the subject of hypothesized human-caused global warming, you probably regularly experience, as I do, a strong sense of cognitive dissonance. On the one hand, you read dozens of pieces from seemingly authoritative media sources, as well as from important political officeholders, declaring that the causal relationship between human CO2 emissions and rapidly rising global temperatures is definitive; declaring that “the science is settled”; and further declaring that impending further increases in temperatures over the next decade or several decades are an “existential crisis” that must be addressed immediately through complete transformation of our economy at enormous cost.
On the other hand, you studied the scientific method back in high school, and you can’t help asking yourself the basic questions that that method entails:
- What is the falsifiable hypothesis that is claimed to have been empirically validated? You can’t find it!
- What was the null hypothesis, and what about the data caused the null hypothesis to be rejected? You can’t find that either!