The leaked emails show the way science isn't supposed to work. Peer review was subverted and we have emails from a clique of scientists doing the perverting.
mindmeld=> Yes, very true. The thing everyone is missing is that this type of fraud happens all the time in science. That is the beauty of peer review. When enough scientists review the data and are unable to reproduce the results or when enough scientists ask for the empirical data and are denied, then the results in question are discredited. That's the way science works to overcome the challenge of a few bad apples in the barrel.
Furthermore, the idea that peer review proves that a paper is TRUTH is invalid as well ... even when peer review is working the way it should it only shows that peers in the field thought the paper worth publishing. It never was a gold seal of approval - yes, this paper is TRUTH and no criticism is warranted.
mindmeld=> Of course, this is true as well, but I'll point out something slightly different. No science proves 100% that anything is "TRUE". All science does is allow us to form theories that fit a data set. The better the theory, the more of the data it explains. So the best we can ever hope for in science is that we can explain most of the data and use it to predict what may happen in the future with a high degree of probability.
The burden of proof should exist on those making a claim - in this case the claim that CO2 from fossil fuels will cause environmental catastrophe. Thats true in any field, not just science.
mindmeld=> Again, this is a true statement and many different fields of science have come to the conclusion that there exists a VERY high probability that humans are the primary cause of the rise in net CO2 emissions and that CO2 increases are the primary cause of global warming. All of the data from multiple disciplines support this conclusion. However, the alternative theory that the GOP and you propagate isn't supported by the data and your constituents have not been able to disprove the scientific consensus. So the scientific process is working properly, despite the few bad apples. You just fail to accept the outcome.
There is no requirement that critics prove an alternative theory. However, there are credible, numbers backed alternative theories. One is that solar cycles are the predominant cause of climate changes.
mindmeld=> The solar cycle theory as a primary root cause has been debunked. All the latest climate change models include solar cycles in their equations, but solar cycles don't explain the anomalies that we are seeing in the warming of the planet. CO2 increases, on the other hand, explain most of the anomaly, after all other factors including solar cycles are taking into account. That is what the scientific consensus is. |
