Climate Change – Fake Science

Part 1 of a discussion about science, plasma physics and climate change

Part 2

About Louis Hissink

Retired diamond exploration geologist. I spent my professional life looking for mineral deposits, found some, and also located a number of kimberlites in NSW and Western Australia. Exploration geology is the closest one can get to practicing the scientific method, mineral exploration always being concerned with finding anomalous geophysical or geochemical data, framing a model and explanation for the anomaly and then testing it with drilling or excavation. All scientific theories are ultimately false since they invariably involved explaining something with incomplete extant knowledge. Since no one is omniscient or knows everything, so too scientific theories which are solely limited to existing knowledge. Because the future always yields new data, scientific theories must change to be compatible with the new data. Thus a true scientist is never in love with any particular theory, always knowing that when the facts change, so too must he/she change their minds.
This entry was posted in plasma universe. Bookmark the permalink.

One Response to Climate Change – Fake Science

  1. Don Kress says:

    As seen in the :
    REPORT OF THE ANNUAL MEETING OF THE
    BRITISH ASTRONOMICAL ASSOCIATION
    HELD ON OCTOBER 28th, I908, AT
    SION COLLEGE, VICTORIA EMBANKMENT.
    F. W. LEVANDER, F.R.A.S., President in the Chair, delivered his address in which it is quoted:

    “The physical structure of the universe has for ages exercised the reasoning faculty of man, resulting in the introduction of various systems, each generally exhibiting some distinct advance on its predecessors. At the close of the eighteenth century these culminated in the presentation to the world of Laplace’s celebrated ” Nebular Hypothesis,” which for many years held undisputed
    sway. But, as its author himself said, it was published “with the distrust which should be inspired by everything that is not the result of observation or calculation.”

    Laplace had the integrity to state that data and observations must drive science. The nebular hypothesis is today revered as ‘written in stone’ and an ultimate truth. However, such a statement was made by Laplace in the belief that the data and observations were sacrosanct. He could not have imagined the chicanery and goings-on of the present day.

    What are we to do when today’s establishments of science are forging the data by trickery such as ‘normalizations’, ‘adjustments’ and other such nonsense? Climate ‘science’ is just such an example of trickery and deceit.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s