3 ms·
Sounds like climate scientists need to read a lot into the epistemology of economics. (It may well be that "economic science" is an oxymoron, but the work that
by thanatropism 12y ago
Sounds like climate scientists need to read a lot into the epistemology of economics. (It may well be that "economic science" is an oxymoron, but the work that has been done to try and make it one...)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_experiment https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_experiment
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Design_of_quasi-experiments https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Design_of_quasi-experiments
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regression_discontinuity https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regression_discontinuity
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instrumental_variable https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instrumental_variable
etc. etc.
- JamesBarney 12y agoOne problem with all of these approaches is they require more then one subject. Unfortunately we only have one earth, so there is no way to have a natural control without CO2 rising, or an earth where the CO2 rose at a different time.
- ende 12y agoWe actually do have a positive and a negative control in orbit on either side of the Earth's. Sorta.