Originally Posted by Vreki
But there lies the problem. Those models are based on historical data, so of course the output of those models will match the historical data. To be predictive, it will have to match future data, and there we again have the problem with the timeframe.
Now, I am actually a great fan of clean energy, and think it is a worthy goal regardless of global warming. And I also think that we should take note of changes in the environment and adapt to them before its to late.
But I argue against The End of Days Due To Global Warming being presented as a fact. It is not. It is a theory, and IMHO one that is a bit weak on the parts that usually are required to be called a scientific theory. e.g. falsifiable predictions.
|
As has been pointed out in many times in many places, there's nothing more reliable in scientific parlance than a Theory. Gravity is a Theory. Conservation of Energy is a Theory.
Theories are the graduate degrees of scientific ideas. They are literally the highest honor an idea can be awarded. So saying "It's just a theory" is like saying "He's only dead." There's nothing bast the 'just'.
Theories are falsifiable, yes. That's why science is better than, say, voodoo.