Climate “Science,” the Social Media “Science”


Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.

– Voltaire

Reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled.

– Richard P. Feynman

CO2isLife has maintained that CAGW is a political, not a scientific movement. Nothing demonstrates that more than the language used in this “science.” Real science talks the language of math and statistics. A real scientist would apply the scientific method as follows:

Step #1: Make an Observation – Global temperatures have been increasing, along with global energy consumption

Step #2: Form a Hypothesis – CO2 is the most significant variable driving global temperatures

Step #3: Collect the Date – Gather the CO2 and temperature data

Step #4: Test and Analyze the Data – Did the temperature population mean fall +/- 2 standard deviations from the null hypothesis value for temperature over the past 150 years vs the previous 12,000 years? Is the R-Square of the regression Temperature (Dependent Variable) vs CO2 (Dependent Variable) over 80?

Step #5: Go back and make needed adjustments and retest – The mean temperature of the past 150 years does not fall outside the norm for the past 12,000 years. Search for another variable that can better explain the temperature variation…like the sun.

Science is a process, not a poll. Slimate clientists treat “science” as a social media posting. They take public polls, feature articles “screened” by the highly biased “Peer Review,” write opinion pieces to sympathetic liberal media outlets, promote with scientifically illiterate celebrities like a bottle of coke, and focus on the “consensus” defined as like-minded people.  People that disagree are given thumbs down, unfriended, cyberbullied, and blocked/censored. The T-Score is never mentioned, the R-Square is never mentioned, the scientific method is never mentioned, the data “adjustments” are never mentioned. The science is irrelevant, the public’s support is all that really matters.

Slimate clience depends on public funding, and therefore, depends on taxpayers’ support. For Slimate clience to survive, they have to turn to politics, because the real science won’t justify the funding and regulatory costs. Almost every major promoter of CAGW has either a financial or political conflict of interest, and that alone corrupts the real process of science. If this was a real science, slimate clientists would attempt to control for those conflicts of interest and inherent biases, but they don’t…and for good reason. The truth is by far the greatest enemy of slimate clientists.

Public opinion can be manipulated, the scientific truth can’t. That is the real problem slimate clientists face. It isn’t the climate skeptics, it is the fact that the numbers can’t be adjusted enough to make their CAGW a valid scientific theory. Real science doesn’t depend on adjusting data to fit a predetermined outcome, to be valid. Real science allows the results of data analysis, not computer models, to determine the outcome and conclusion. The results of the scientific method determine the conclusion of real science. Slimate clientists start with the conclusion that CO2 is the cause and then work backward by adjusting data so their computer models give them the desired results. That isn’t science, that is scientific malpractice, defrauding the taxpayer and betrayal of the public’s trust. In other words, it is complete and absolute fraud.

Please Like, Share, Subscribe and Comment


7 thoughts on “Climate “Science,” the Social Media “Science””

Leave a Reply

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

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

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google 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 )

Connecting to %s