Science depends on good quality of data. It also relies on replication and sharing data. But the last couple of days have uncovered some shocking revelations...
If you weren't vacationing in Rwanda, you would know that some hackers brought some rather interesting information to light, continues Dr. Lott:
...Computer hackers have obtained 160 megabytes of e-mails from the Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia in England. These e-mails, which have now been confirmed as real, involved many researchers across the globe with ideologically similar advocates around the world. They were brazenly discussing the destruction and hiding of data that did not support global warming claims. The academics here also worked closely with the U.N.'s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
So there you have it. Global warming isn't based on true science, but rather a belief that is reinforced with a priori arguments. While inductive reasoning is used when trying to prove a premise, what if the premise is wrong? Most progress is made with deductive reasoning which deconstructs observation and its data in an effort to find out why. Basically we use reason and logical analysis of the facts. When the data does not support a premise, we move on. In the case of global warming, reason is exchanged for dogma and politics. What ensues constitutes religion, not science and it is ironic, since these same "scientists" eschew creationism or even intelligent design. I guess it's all in what you believe, not what you can prove, and if the collective says so, it must be true.
So, while the religion may seem to be global warming, I would contend it really is not. The UN is their church, and their religion is global marxism. Global warming is but one gospel from their play book. What are the other gospels? I can name a few: Socialized medicine, government controlled and regulated businesses, and generically regulating human behavior, to extreme, vis a vis gun control etc. Can you name a few?
Thank you for reading this blog.