The basic problem with climate science is a number of practitioners want the most consequential conclusions to be accepted like those conclusions were the result of real experiments when in reality those conclusions are the result of thought experiments. The earth doesn’t conduct experiments. You have a sample size of one, inability to replicate, and inability to isolate variables. That’s no experimental science and without that ability it won’t become an experimental science. You and your colleagues must come to grips with the fact that climate science is a soft-science with imminently escapable conclusions. Everyone not so desperate to be taken as seriously as a heart attack knows the difference between climate forecasting and chemistry.
↧