To: Don Green who wrote (191 ) 4/28/2022 2:51:19 PM From: Thomas A Watson Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 942 wattsupwiththat.com has been and is the “…the world’s most viewed climate website” – Fred Pearce The Climate Files: The Battle for the Truth about Global Warming As a Scientist and Engineer who has authored many science based engineering solutions, the quality of info posted is very good. Is “Climate Change” science or pseudoscience? 6 days ago Andy May 411 Comments By Andy May I have a new op-ed in the Washington Examiner today that questions whether “climate change,” as commonly defined today, is a scientific concept. The op-ed is a very brief summary of a longer post on the topic here . The longer post contains all the references and links to supporting material, including a link to Karl Popper ‘s famous book on the definitions of science and pseudoscience, called Conjectures and Refutations . From the op-ed: “Tornados, nor’easters, hurricanes, mid-winter thaws, 100-degree days, cold snaps, droughts, and flooding creeks all are presented as evidence of human-caused climate change, “proof” that human emissions of carbon dioxide are leading to an overheated planet. However, Karl Popper, the famous philosopher, would say that these meteorological events do not support human-caused climate change because none of them can falsify the idea. If every event supports an idea, and no event can falsify it, the idea is not a scientific hypothesis. Popper’s examples of pseudoscience included Marx’s theory of history. He observed on page 35 of his famous book, that “A Marxist could not open a newspaper without finding on every page, confirming evidence” for the theory. Freud’s theories were the same; every clinical case confirmed his ideas. A hypothesis that is not refutable by any conceivable event is not scientific.” Washington Examiner .