5 ms·

Lol no, 'imagining the alternative' is not science. Climate science is the study of weather and temperatures. You are thinking 'Greenhouse effect'. Just becaus

Lol no, 'imagining the alternative' is not science. Climate science is the study of weather and temperatures. You are thinking 'Greenhouse effect'. Just because science is not impervious to corruption by money doesn't invalidate it or the vast amounts of data gathered in support of man made climate change. As far as your [1] theory how can you claim that the atmosphere has no effect on the ability to capture the heat from the sun? The moon has no atmosphere and because of this reaches -183 degrees Celsius at night.

erichocean 5y ago
I'm not making any claim beyond the claim that "science" has become infused with power, and as a result, powerful ideas (that are only weakly true) beat true ideas that aren't powerful. I believe "climate science" in particular has observably more power than truth. No one was ever promoted for saying that CO2 emissions won't destroy the Earth, despite their homeopathic levels in the air. In fact, you can be the head of a climate research laboratory, respected for decades, and get fired if you do say that. The CO2 idea is so powerful it gets its enemies fired. That's power in action, and "climate science" absolutely has it, whereas equally plausible alternatives do not.
- rsfern 5y ago
  Atmospheric CO2 level is a couple hundred ppm, which is way more concentrated than many homeopathic remedies at like 1e-60. I think you are basically making emotional arguments instead of evidence based arguments, at least on the climate science thing. I’m not arguing that science is free from politics though, but I don’t think you’ve presented any plausible alternatives in this discussion
- zapataband1 5y ago
  I agree with science is prone to corruption. As far as climate science having power...it was opposed by every giant oil, gas, extraction corporation and actively suppressed for decades, with these companies funding rival fake science. Science is still science, science minded people will hear you out provided evidence. If someone wants to claim CO2 doesn't cause climate change and they have a good argument I still believe someone will listen. Einstein was ridiculed for years about his ideas, you could say he had majority of 'institutional-science power' against him, but ideas still won out.

erichocean 5y ago

I'm not making any claim beyond the claim that "science" has become infused with power, and as a result, powerful ideas (that are only weakly true) beat true ideas that aren't powerful. I believe "climate science" in particular has observably more power than truth. No one was ever promoted for saying that CO2 emissions won't destroy the Earth, despite their homeopathic levels in the air. In fact, you can be the head of a climate research laboratory, respected for decades, and get fired if you do say that. The CO2 idea is so powerful it gets its enemies fired. That's power in action, and "climate science" absolutely has it, whereas equally plausible alternatives do not.

rsfern 5y ago
Atmospheric CO2 level is a couple hundred ppm, which is way more concentrated than many homeopathic remedies at like 1e-60. I think you are basically making emotional arguments instead of evidence based arguments, at least on the climate science thing. I’m not arguing that science is free from politics though, but I don’t think you’ve presented any plausible alternatives in this discussion
zapataband1 5y ago
I agree with science is prone to corruption. As far as climate science having power...it was opposed by every giant oil, gas, extraction corporation and actively suppressed for decades, with these companies funding rival fake science. Science is still science, science minded people will hear you out provided evidence. If someone wants to claim CO2 doesn't cause climate change and they have a good argument I still believe someone will listen. Einstein was ridiculed for years about his ideas, you could say he had majority of 'institutional-science power' against him, but ideas still won out.