info
Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Re: Why cant they prove climate change?
7 views
Skip to first unread message
Beam Me Up Scotty
Nov 26, 2015, 11:40:14 AM11/26/15
to
On 11/26/2015 08:33 AM, Tom Sr. wrote:
> --------------------
> http://www.livescience.com/20896-science-scientific-method.html
>
> *Science & the Scientific Method: A Definition*
> by Alina Bradford, Live Science Contributor
> March 30, 2015
>
> Science is a systematic and logical approach to discovering how things in the universe work. It is also the body of knowledge accumulated through the discoveries about all the things in the universe.
>
> The word "science" is derived from the Latin word scientia, which is knowledge based on demonstrable and reproducible data, according to the Merriam-Webster Dictionary. True to this definition, science aims for measurable results through testing and analysis. Science is based on fact, not opinion or preferences. The process of science is designed to challenge ideas through research. One important aspect of the scientific process is that it is focuses only on the natural world, according to the University of California. Anything that is considered supernatural does not fit into the definition of science.
>
>
> * The Scientific Method
>
> When conducting research, scientists use the scientific method to collect measurable, empirical evidence in an experiment related to a hypothesis (often in the form of an if/then statement), the results aiming to support or contradict a theory.
>
> The steps of the scientific method go something like this:
>
> 1. Make an observation or observations.
>
> 2. Ask questions about the observations and gather information.
>
> 3. Form a hypothesis -- a tentative description of what's been observed, and make predictions based on that hypothesis.
>
> 4. Test the hypothesis and predictions in an experiment that can be reproduced.
>
> 5. Analyze the data and draw conclusions; accept or reject the hypothesis or modify the hypothesis if necessary.
>
> 6. Reproduce the experiment until there are no discrepancies between observations and theory. "Replication of methods and results is my favorite step in the scientific method," Moshe Pritsker, a former post-doctoral researcher at Harvard Medical School and CEO of JoVE, told Live Science. "The reproducibility of published experiments is the foundation of science. No reproducibility - no science."
>
>
> Some key underpinnings to the scientific method:
>
> * The hypothesis must be testable and falsifiable, according to North Carolina State University. Falsifiable means that there must be a possible negative answer to the hypothesis.
>
> * Research must involve deductive reasoning and inductive reasoning. Deductive reasoning is the process of using true premises to reach a logical true conclusion while inductive reasoning takes the opposite approach.
>
> * An experiment should include a dependent variable (which does not change) and an independent variable (which does change).
>
> * An experiment should include an experimental group and a control group. The control group is what the experimental group is compared against.
>
>
> * Scientific Theories and Laws
>
> The scientific method and science in general can be frustrating. A theory is almost never proven, though a few theories do become scientific laws. One example would be the laws of conservation of energy, which is the first law of thermodynamics. Dr. Linda Boland, a neurobiologist and chairperson of the biology department at the University of Richmond, Virginia, told Live Science that this is her favorite scientific law. "This is one that guides much of my research on cellular electrical activity and it states that energy cannot be created nor destroyed, only changed in form. This law continually reminds me of the many forms of energy," she said.
>
> Laws are generally considered to be without exception, though some laws have been modified over time after further testing found discrepancies. This does not mean theories are not meaningful. For a hypothesis to become a theory, rigorous testing must occur, typically across multiple disciplines by separate groups of scientists. Saying something is "just a theory" is a layperson's term that has no relationship to science. To most people a theory is a hunch. In science a theory is the framework for observations and facts, Jaime Tanner, a professor of biology at Marlboro College, told Live Science.
>
>
> * A Brief History of Science
>
> The earliest evidence of science can be found in prehistoric times, such as the discovery of fire, invention of the wheel and development of writing. Early tablets contain numerals and information about the solar system. Science became decidedly more scientific over time, however.
Until Liberalism started to use it for propaganda....
>
> 1200s: Robert Grosseteste developed the framework for the proper methods of modern scientific experimentation, Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. His works included the principle that an inquiry must be based on measurable evidence that is confirmed through testing.
>
> 1400s: Leonardo da Vinci began his notebooks in pursuit of evidence that the human body is microcosmic. The artist, scientist and mathematician also gathered information about optics and hydrodynamics.
>
> 1500s: Nicolaus Copernicus advanced the understanding of the solar system with his discovery of heliocentrism. This is a model in which the Earth and planets revolve around the sun, which is the center of the solar system.
>
> 1600s: Johannes Kepler built upon those observations with his laws of planetary motion. Galileo improved on a new invention, the telescope, and used it to study the sun and planets. The 1600s also saw advancements in the study of physics as Isaac Newton developed his laws of motion.
>
> 1700s: Benjamin Franklin discovered that lightning is electrical. He also contributed to the study of oceanography and meteorology. The understanding of chemistry also evolved during this century as Antoine Lavoisier, dubbed the father of modern chemistry, developed the law of conservation of mass.
>
> 1800s: Milestones included Alessandro Volta's discoveries regarding electrochemical series, which leads to the invention of the battery. John Dalton also introduces atomic theory, which stated that all matter is composed of atoms that combine to form molecules. The basis of modern study of genetics advanced as Gregor Mendel unveiled his laws of inheritance. Later in the century, Wilhelm Conrad Röntgen discovered X-rays, while George Ohm's Ohm's law provided the basis for understanding how to harness electrical charges.
>
> 1900s: The discoveries of Albert Einstein, who is best known for his theory of relativity, dominated the beginning of the 20th century. Einstein's theory of relativity is actually two separate theories. His special theory of relativity, which he outlined in a 1905 paper, "The Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies," concluded that time must change according to the speed of a moving object relative to the frame of reference of an observer. His second theory of general relativity, which he published as "The Foundation of the General Theory of Relativity," advanced the idea that matter causes space to curve.
>
> Medicine forever changed with the development of the polio vaccine in 1952 by Jonas Salk. The following year, James D. Watson and Francis Crick discovered the structure of DNA, which is a double helix formed by base pairs attached to a sugar-phosphate backbone, according to the United States National Library of Medicine.
>
> 2000s: The 21st century saw the first draft of the human genome completed, leading to a greater understanding of DNA. This advanced the study of genetics, its role in human biology and its use as a predictor of diseases and other disorders.
> ------------
>
> Additional reporting by Kim Ann Zimmermann and Robert Roy Britt.
> --------------------
>
empirical
"b. Verifiable or provable by means of observation or experiment:"
There is a suggestion of a consensus and that is NOT empirical evidence.
That makes Global Warming being connected to humans an opinion.
Albeit an opinion held by many it still isn't a fact.
Just as gay being a sexual identity is an opinion and can't be proven
since gay is all in the head of the person that believes they are gay.
That makes being gay no more than a delusion. Until some empirical
evidence is produced to verify that it's real.
"Anything that is considered supernatural does not fit into the
definition of science."
Since gay can't be proven and is akin to having a soul and neither can
be proven to be any more than a delusion, then gay is NOT a scientific
fact. Gays are just delusional people. Since when do we allow
delusional people to tell us what reality is and what should be legal?
The thread that connects these is Liberalism. Liberalism does NOT
respect the rules of science. Liberalism is NOT logical.
--
The ideology of Liberalism is a never ending stream of contradictions.
> --------------------
> http://www.livescience.com/20896-science-scientific-method.html
>
> *Science & the Scientific Method: A Definition*
> by Alina Bradford, Live Science Contributor
> March 30, 2015
>
> Science is a systematic and logical approach to discovering how things in the universe work. It is also the body of knowledge accumulated through the discoveries about all the things in the universe.
>
> The word "science" is derived from the Latin word scientia, which is knowledge based on demonstrable and reproducible data, according to the Merriam-Webster Dictionary. True to this definition, science aims for measurable results through testing and analysis. Science is based on fact, not opinion or preferences. The process of science is designed to challenge ideas through research. One important aspect of the scientific process is that it is focuses only on the natural world, according to the University of California. Anything that is considered supernatural does not fit into the definition of science.
>
>
> * The Scientific Method
>
> When conducting research, scientists use the scientific method to collect measurable, empirical evidence in an experiment related to a hypothesis (often in the form of an if/then statement), the results aiming to support or contradict a theory.
>
> The steps of the scientific method go something like this:
>
> 1. Make an observation or observations.
>
> 2. Ask questions about the observations and gather information.
>
> 3. Form a hypothesis -- a tentative description of what's been observed, and make predictions based on that hypothesis.
>
> 4. Test the hypothesis and predictions in an experiment that can be reproduced.
>
> 5. Analyze the data and draw conclusions; accept or reject the hypothesis or modify the hypothesis if necessary.
>
> 6. Reproduce the experiment until there are no discrepancies between observations and theory. "Replication of methods and results is my favorite step in the scientific method," Moshe Pritsker, a former post-doctoral researcher at Harvard Medical School and CEO of JoVE, told Live Science. "The reproducibility of published experiments is the foundation of science. No reproducibility - no science."
>
>
> Some key underpinnings to the scientific method:
>
> * The hypothesis must be testable and falsifiable, according to North Carolina State University. Falsifiable means that there must be a possible negative answer to the hypothesis.
>
> * Research must involve deductive reasoning and inductive reasoning. Deductive reasoning is the process of using true premises to reach a logical true conclusion while inductive reasoning takes the opposite approach.
>
> * An experiment should include a dependent variable (which does not change) and an independent variable (which does change).
>
> * An experiment should include an experimental group and a control group. The control group is what the experimental group is compared against.
>
>
> * Scientific Theories and Laws
>
> The scientific method and science in general can be frustrating. A theory is almost never proven, though a few theories do become scientific laws. One example would be the laws of conservation of energy, which is the first law of thermodynamics. Dr. Linda Boland, a neurobiologist and chairperson of the biology department at the University of Richmond, Virginia, told Live Science that this is her favorite scientific law. "This is one that guides much of my research on cellular electrical activity and it states that energy cannot be created nor destroyed, only changed in form. This law continually reminds me of the many forms of energy," she said.
>
> Laws are generally considered to be without exception, though some laws have been modified over time after further testing found discrepancies. This does not mean theories are not meaningful. For a hypothesis to become a theory, rigorous testing must occur, typically across multiple disciplines by separate groups of scientists. Saying something is "just a theory" is a layperson's term that has no relationship to science. To most people a theory is a hunch. In science a theory is the framework for observations and facts, Jaime Tanner, a professor of biology at Marlboro College, told Live Science.
>
>
> * A Brief History of Science
>
> The earliest evidence of science can be found in prehistoric times, such as the discovery of fire, invention of the wheel and development of writing. Early tablets contain numerals and information about the solar system. Science became decidedly more scientific over time, however.
Until Liberalism started to use it for propaganda....
>
> 1200s: Robert Grosseteste developed the framework for the proper methods of modern scientific experimentation, Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. His works included the principle that an inquiry must be based on measurable evidence that is confirmed through testing.
>
> 1400s: Leonardo da Vinci began his notebooks in pursuit of evidence that the human body is microcosmic. The artist, scientist and mathematician also gathered information about optics and hydrodynamics.
>
> 1500s: Nicolaus Copernicus advanced the understanding of the solar system with his discovery of heliocentrism. This is a model in which the Earth and planets revolve around the sun, which is the center of the solar system.
>
> 1600s: Johannes Kepler built upon those observations with his laws of planetary motion. Galileo improved on a new invention, the telescope, and used it to study the sun and planets. The 1600s also saw advancements in the study of physics as Isaac Newton developed his laws of motion.
>
> 1700s: Benjamin Franklin discovered that lightning is electrical. He also contributed to the study of oceanography and meteorology. The understanding of chemistry also evolved during this century as Antoine Lavoisier, dubbed the father of modern chemistry, developed the law of conservation of mass.
>
> 1800s: Milestones included Alessandro Volta's discoveries regarding electrochemical series, which leads to the invention of the battery. John Dalton also introduces atomic theory, which stated that all matter is composed of atoms that combine to form molecules. The basis of modern study of genetics advanced as Gregor Mendel unveiled his laws of inheritance. Later in the century, Wilhelm Conrad Röntgen discovered X-rays, while George Ohm's Ohm's law provided the basis for understanding how to harness electrical charges.
>
> 1900s: The discoveries of Albert Einstein, who is best known for his theory of relativity, dominated the beginning of the 20th century. Einstein's theory of relativity is actually two separate theories. His special theory of relativity, which he outlined in a 1905 paper, "The Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies," concluded that time must change according to the speed of a moving object relative to the frame of reference of an observer. His second theory of general relativity, which he published as "The Foundation of the General Theory of Relativity," advanced the idea that matter causes space to curve.
>
> Medicine forever changed with the development of the polio vaccine in 1952 by Jonas Salk. The following year, James D. Watson and Francis Crick discovered the structure of DNA, which is a double helix formed by base pairs attached to a sugar-phosphate backbone, according to the United States National Library of Medicine.
>
> 2000s: The 21st century saw the first draft of the human genome completed, leading to a greater understanding of DNA. This advanced the study of genetics, its role in human biology and its use as a predictor of diseases and other disorders.
> ------------
>
> Additional reporting by Kim Ann Zimmermann and Robert Roy Britt.
> --------------------
>
empirical
"b. Verifiable or provable by means of observation or experiment:"
There is a suggestion of a consensus and that is NOT empirical evidence.
That makes Global Warming being connected to humans an opinion.
Albeit an opinion held by many it still isn't a fact.
Just as gay being a sexual identity is an opinion and can't be proven
since gay is all in the head of the person that believes they are gay.
That makes being gay no more than a delusion. Until some empirical
evidence is produced to verify that it's real.
"Anything that is considered supernatural does not fit into the
definition of science."
Since gay can't be proven and is akin to having a soul and neither can
be proven to be any more than a delusion, then gay is NOT a scientific
fact. Gays are just delusional people. Since when do we allow
delusional people to tell us what reality is and what should be legal?
The thread that connects these is Liberalism. Liberalism does NOT
respect the rules of science. Liberalism is NOT logical.
--
The ideology of Liberalism is a never ending stream of contradictions.
Christian Hegele
Nov 28, 2015, 4:07:50 AM11/28/15
to
https://www.skepticalscience.com/empirical-evidence-for-global-warming.htm
Scientists can and have "proved" it -- as indisputably as one can prove
anything in the natural sciences. The appeal to authority you mention
(i.e., "97% of climate scientists believe...") is certainly not
scientific "proof" of global warming, and was never intended to be.
Rather, it's an argument for why you should believe in man made global
warming -- for the benefit of people, like yourself, who are unwilling
to examine or unable to understand the evidence.
CJH
Scientists can and have "proved" it -- as indisputably as one can prove
anything in the natural sciences. The appeal to authority you mention
(i.e., "97% of climate scientists believe...") is certainly not
scientific "proof" of global warming, and was never intended to be.
Rather, it's an argument for why you should believe in man made global
warming -- for the benefit of people, like yourself, who are unwilling
to examine or unable to understand the evidence.
CJH
benj
Nov 28, 2015, 5:29:00 AM11/28/15
to
On 11/28/2015 04:07 AM, Christian Hegele wrote:
> https://www.skepticalscience.com/empirical-evidence-for-global-warming.htm
>
> Scientists can and have "proved" it -- as indisputably as one can prove
> anything in the natural sciences. The appeal to authority you mention
> (i.e., "97% of climate scientists believe...") is certainly not
> scientific "proof" of global warming, and was never intended to be.
> Rather, it's an argument for why you should believe in man made global
> warming -- for the benefit of people, like yourself, who are unwilling
> to examine or unable to understand the evidence.
>
> CJH
97% is a TOTAL lie! And you know that as well as I do. But propaganda is
> https://www.skepticalscience.com/empirical-evidence-for-global-warming.htm
>
> Scientists can and have "proved" it -- as indisputably as one can prove
> anything in the natural sciences. The appeal to authority you mention
> (i.e., "97% of climate scientists believe...") is certainly not
> scientific "proof" of global warming, and was never intended to be.
> Rather, it's an argument for why you should believe in man made global
> warming -- for the benefit of people, like yourself, who are unwilling
> to examine or unable to understand the evidence.
>
> CJH
based on lies and that's what you warmballers do. Science is NOT decided
by majority vote. There has been no warming for 17 years! 1940-1970 CO2
went UP and temperature wend DOWN! So much for that CO2 causality! Today
CO2 still going up and Temperature FLAT. ALL "climate change models have
been TOTALLY wrong completely over estimating warming to create stories
of doom! Rising sea levels are not riving geezers out of Florida! Even the
When one is spinning lies like you are, evidence is all on the other
side. Which of your statements would like me to PROVE is a lie?
The failed cartoonist at skepticalscience (who is NOT a scientist) is
the biggest paid liar of them all. Shame on you for posting such
nonsense as science.
Perhaps your time would be better spent trying to eliminate the Pacific
plastic pile, or stop Brazil from cutting down the rain forests that
make oxygen for all of us and suck in CO2? Being a hypocrite doesn't
bother you at all, does it?
--
___ ___ ___ ___
/\ \ /\ \ /\__\ /\ \
/::\ \ /::\ \ /::| | \:\ \
/:/\:\ \ /:/\:\ \ /:|:| | ___ /::\__\
/::\~\:\__\ /::\~\:\ \ /:/|:| |__ /\ /:/\/__/
/:/\:\ \:|__| /:/\:\ \:\__\ /:/ |:| /\__\ \:\/:/ /
\:\~\:\/:/ / \:\~\:\ \/__/ \/__|:|/:/ / \::/ /
\:\ \::/ / \:\ \:\__\ |:/:/ / \/__/
\:\/:/ / \:\ \/__/ |::/ /
\::/__/ \:\__\ /:/ /
~~ \/__/ \/__/
Frank
Nov 28, 2015, 12:35:31 PM11/28/15
to
Most know that maybe 15% of our population in the US is functionally
illiterate, that is they cannot read beyond road signs or newspaper head
lines.
But, how many understand science fundamentals. I'll bet it is
considerably higher.
These folks are taken advantage by those that want to drive their
political agendas.
0 new messages