Science fights back against the global warming fra
Post# of 51876
(Total Views: 298)
Posted On: 06/11/2017 11:57:30 AM
Re: powercrush86 #23279
Science fights back against the global warming fraud
By Thomas Lifson
It has taken far too long, but the self-correcting mechanisms of science finally are contradicting the global warming fraud. Despite billions of dollars of grants for those who support the so-called “consensus” (itself, a lie), and the fear of retaliation, scholars interested in the truth are publishing a wave of scientific papers contradicting the orthodoxy.
Best of all: President Trump’s EPA chief has signaled that he sees that questioning of scientific hypotheses (and all scientific knowledge ultimately is a hypothesis, awaiting a possible correction based on new information) is legitimate.
Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Scott Pruitt reignited a long simmering debate over a method of scientific inquiry that could upset the supposed “consensus” on man-made global warming.
In an interview with Breitbart’s Joel Pollak on Monday, Pruitt said he supported a “red team-blue team” set up to test climate science. Pruitt was inspired by an op-ed by theoretical physicist Steven Koonin, but others have been pushing this idea as well.
Since solar activity does vary, it kind of makes more intuitive sense that this might affect climate more than the level of CO2 in the atmosphere. Occam’s Razor favors this explanation. Check out this graph that Richards highlights:
The team that will question the orthodoxy is seeing a wave of evidence come its way.
By Thomas Lifson
It has taken far too long, but the self-correcting mechanisms of science finally are contradicting the global warming fraud. Despite billions of dollars of grants for those who support the so-called “consensus” (itself, a lie), and the fear of retaliation, scholars interested in the truth are publishing a wave of scientific papers contradicting the orthodoxy.
Best of all: President Trump’s EPA chief has signaled that he sees that questioning of scientific hypotheses (and all scientific knowledge ultimately is a hypothesis, awaiting a possible correction based on new information) is legitimate.
Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Scott Pruitt reignited a long simmering debate over a method of scientific inquiry that could upset the supposed “consensus” on man-made global warming.
In an interview with Breitbart’s Joel Pollak on Monday, Pruitt said he supported a “red team-blue team” set up to test climate science. Pruitt was inspired by an op-ed by theoretical physicist Steven Koonin, but others have been pushing this idea as well.
Since solar activity does vary, it kind of makes more intuitive sense that this might affect climate more than the level of CO2 in the atmosphere. Occam’s Razor favors this explanation. Check out this graph that Richards highlights:
The team that will question the orthodoxy is seeing a wave of evidence come its way.
(0)
(0)