myReview 2 mo

The Conclusions of Climate "Scientists" violate the scientific method.

The Conclusions of Climate Scientists violate the scientific method.
The scientific method has been the foundation of legitimate scientific research for over 400 years and has served to advance human understanding of the natural world. Applying scientific research in any other manner is in error or at worst, dishonest. The objective of scientific research should be to pursue the truth, not confirm any personal or institutional biases, as much of climate science research does today.

The scientific method requires that specialists follow a discipline for conducting research:

*Observation of a scientific phenomenon, applying reasonable skepticism about what is observed, given that even sensible assumptions can distort how the observation is interpreted; where he observer presupposes a desired outcome due to bias.

*Construction of a hypothesis or set of of them that clearly and accurately state a supposition or proposed explanation made based on limited evidence as a starting point for further investigation.

*Develop a framework for an experiment or other investigation to verify or falsify the hypotheses.

*Measure the results of the experiment or investigation. Implicit in the validity of the scientific method to conduct research is the ability of the researcher (and others) to objectively verify or falsify the hypothesis by reproducing results of the experiment.

*Refine or eliminate the hypotheses. The results of the experiment or investigation may cause one to fine tune the hypotheses to include or eliminate factors that do or do not appear to have a causative effect on the phenomena observed.

*The hypothesis should be discarded if the results of the experiment falsify the hypothesis.

If the scientific method is rigorously employed in an unbiased manner in the conduct of climate research regarding the man-made global warming claim, it would be expected that a climate scientist who believed that man may have caused global warming that would adversely affect life on Earth in the future would construct the following hypothesis:

"Man has caused global warming, which will result in future climate conditions that will adversely affect life on Earth."

However, this hypothesis actually contains three conjectures that must be developed into a complex hypothesis:

1. Global warming has occurred — that is, the temperature of the world's relevant atmosphere, oceans, and land mass has increased during the period under investigation by a statistically significant amount.

2. Man's activities are responsible for the global warming that has occurred.

3. The extent to which global warming has occurred, or is reasonably projected to occur in the future, will adversely affect life on Earth."

If any of these conjectures in the complex hypothesis above is found to be invalid, the complex hypothesis is rendered null. If so, the investigator must either modify the hypothesis or discard it.

If an unbiased climate scientist were to take the necessary steps to test the complex hypothesis above, it should be undertaken in a sequential fashion. He would first begin an investigation to determine if the temperature of the world's relevant atmosphere, oceans, and land mass has increased during the period under investigation by a statistically significant amount.

In 1979, the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration began to launch a series of satellites to circle the globe, using microwave sounding units (MSU) to measure the temperature of various layers of the lower troposphere. The MSU readings are analyzed using spectrographic analysis and mathematically converted to a temperature record. The temperature readings are then used to calculate what is known as a temperature anomaly.

The temperature anomaly for a period (day, month, or year) is calculated by averaging the high and low temperatures for the period and then comparing that average to the average of the same period in a prior time frame. For example, if the average temperature for the troposphere in a given month is measured to be -50°C, and the average temperature for the same month the prior year was measured to be -50.5°C, the temperature anomaly would be +0.5 °C — it warmed by 0.5°C.

In the case of the UA Huntsville temperature record, the monthly averages are compared to a base period, which is the average of the prior thirty-year temperature anomalies. The data are then analyzed by scientists at the University of Alabama-Huntsville to prepare graphical conclusions of the results.

The UAH graph that for the period 1979–1998, there was continual cooling of the lower troposphere of around 0.3°C per year. From 1999 to 2009, an overall cooling trend can also be observed. Then, from 2020 to present, there has been an overall cooling trend of around 0.3°C. Each of these cooling periods occurred during a time in which the concentration of CO2 in the Earth's lower troposphere increased from about 335 ppm to 420 ppm (25%). These data are publicly available.

This fact falsifies the man-made CO2-based global warming hypothesis, rendering it null and void. In the field of scientific investigation, if the data invalidate a hypothesis, the hypothesis is falsified. Clearly, the data prove the global warming hypothesis wrong.

Scientists continue to promote a failed hypothesis. Why is that? The legal definition of fraud is intent to deceive.

The Conclusions of Climate "Scientists" violate the scientific method.
12 Opinion