See here for yet another example of the tawdry arrogance that characterises the alarmist approach:
The Met Office refuses to release data and methodology for their HadCRUT global temperature dataset after being asked repeatedly. Without the data and procedures there is no possibility of replication, and without replication the Hadley climate data is not scientifically valid.
Of course, the catastrophists who rely on this 'science' for their alarmist views distinguish themselves by arrogantly hectoring their opponents and labelling those who question them as unscientific!
This is is merely another example of censorship to further a political power grab.
Popper might say they're capable of being falsified. No scientific proposition or theory can *really* be verified.
ReplyDeletePopper might say that, and I agree with him to a point. However, I note that David Stove has little time for Popper.
ReplyDeleteStove would say that Popper misunderstands what it is to know something, while Popper would say that there are very few things we can actually know.
In any event the warming catastrophists seem to think they know something with such a high degree of certainty that we mast take drastic action now, and by the way we are not allowed to subject their research to any serious scrutiny.