5 ms·
This is a sciency-sounding position that actually misrepresents science. Since scientists are not gods, just as with macroeconomics and astrophysics and paleont
by abalone 8y ago
This is a sciency-sounding position that actually misrepresents science. Since scientists are not gods, just as with macroeconomics and astrophysics and paleontology, climate science cannot readily “test to falsify a hypothesis.” We are restricted to observing the universe and hoping to come across useful data we can compare and contrast. Thus to imply that the inability to regularly cleanly isolate and test variables in these disciplines is unscientific is itself a disservice to science.
- CamperBob2 8y agoNo, that pretty much is the definition of modern (Popperian) science. At least the sort of science that we should require in order to justify rewiring trillion-dollar economies.
- abalone 8y agoOy vey. Astrophysics is in opposition to Popper's philosophy now, huh? Scientists in these fields falsify theories all the time.
- CamperBob2 8y ago(Shrug) Nobody is asking us to shut down air travel and stop eating steak because of an anthropogenic increase in the cosmic microwave background.
- abalone 8y agoGood to know your opinion of the scientific method depends on the political implications of its conclusions.
- CamperBob2 8y ago"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof." - Carl Sagan "No, extraordinary claims don't require more proof than any others, but extraordinary demands do." - Me
- jessaustin 8y agoThis "astronomy makes no predictions" meme is goofy. Halley got a comet named after him by predicting the year of its return. That was a completely falsifiable hypothesis. If you like something a bit more current, there are plenty of falsifiable hypotheses concerning e.g. neutrino mass that various underground/under-ice detectors will test in the next few years. Such hypotheses are not inherently impossible for climate science.