Abacus News
News That Counts
Skepticism to Global Warming Science is Rising
We tend to trust science. Our modern day prophets no longer listen to God, but to their computer models. The latest global warming farce is a prime example of why we should question scientists about their version of science.
In the Old Testament we read that if a prophet hears from God, the prophecy will come about. But if that prophet is blurting out his own opinions and thoughts dressed up as God's message, then the prophecy will not be fulfilled and the prophet is to be stoned. This may be a bit drastic in the case of the climate scientists, their computers are after all not God.
The problem is that scientists are treated in the media as prophets of some or other god. Their "data" is considered more trustworthy than the Bible. I am old, retired and have gray hair, but in those early days of computing, memories almost lost in the fog of time, we had a saying; "Garbage in; garbage out." The quality of the computer's results are directly related to the quality of the data entered into the computer.
Also, in the old days, scientists had a respect for science. Sometime in the late 1960s a new generation of scientists emerged who valued quantity of research above quality. The world oil crisis in the 1970s changed the general attitude to research funding leading to a commercialization of research. This led to the fiasco in climate change research, which is a product of this attitude. Science should be independent of commercial interests.
Science studies, describes and explains the material world, based on what can be observed and measured. If something is not measurable, then that is not proof that it does not exist. Radio waves existed since the beginning of time, which was long before radios were invented. Sub atomic particles have interacted according to the laws of quantum physics while quantum physics was beyond the realms of fantasy.
Scientists should restrict themselves to their area of expertise and study the world as it is. I am a retired chemist and geologist, and have failed to understand the "science" these climate "scientists" based their conclusions on. It never made scientific sense. Now, thanks to the leaked emails we know that the science these climate scientists had expertise in, was not climate science.
What is sad is to see how many people are still duped. A BBC study showing the difference in public opinion between November 2009 and January 2010, before and after the "Climategate" fiasco was exposed, showed how the public can believe in fairy tales told in the name of science.
The poll showed that 25% of those questioned did not think global warming was happening, which was an increase of 10% since a similar poll was conducted in November 2009.
The percentage of respondents who said climate change was a reality had fallen from 83% in November 2009 to 75% in the beginning of February 2010.
In February 2010, 26% of people thought "climate change is happening and is now established as largely man-made."
In November 2009, a similar poll showed that 41% thought that climate change was happening and it was largely the result of human activities.
Mankind has polluted the Earth and has caused expansion of deserts, but climate forces are driven by forces which we, humankind, are far to puny to affect. So called scientist, who talk about man made climate change are lying as there is no clear understanding yet of the mechanisms behind the climatic cycles.
The Earth was much warmer in medieval times than it is today. The polar bears survived that, and so did the human race. This Medieval Warm Period (MWP), which was ignored by the climate scientists, was followed by the Little Ice Age. The Little Ice Age ended towards the end of the 19th Century. We are at the moment going into another, but shorter, cold period. Nothing we do can change that.
We just have to live with it and accept we are not little gods who have the power to change the universe.
We can influence how we damage our bodies and minds (souls). Science was behind the daft idea of embedding a toxic substance in our mouths as standard approved consensus science. Mercury was not considered so toxic then. Neither was asbestos and many other products.
It would be encouraging if the public was more informed, instead of believing scientist who do not know and understand the world around us any more than the average layman.
Another area in which scientist make statements as if they are competent authorities, is about faith and religious beliefs. the sphere of science does not go beyond this material world. Beyond that is philosophy, theology and spirituality. No scientist is competent to make an authoritative statement in the name of science in these subjects.
An interesting example of a scientist showing himself to be a hypocrite by saying science has all the answers is Richard Dawkins in this interview with Ben Stein. He publicly mocks people who believe in God or Intelligent Design, as being primitive and superstitious, yet he believes life began on Earth by another life form, but more evolved than we are today, somehow seeded Earth with life. No proof is needed as this is what some scientists apparently believe.
Personally I will believe in God and not in little green men as the creator of life.
