Ever been told that the Science Is Settled with Global Warming? Well read this and decide for yourself!

Considering that many governments and agencies such as the United Nations endorse the global warming theory and the mass of foundations springing up everywhere collecting money for “further research” and so on, I understand how many people must be concerned with the perceived danger of Global Warming.

I have to tell you some truths and facts about what you are being told. At this stage I will leave it with the reader to contemplate why such powerful agencies and wealthy
powerful people should take such interest in such a controversial “science”.

12. 12. 1. Please bear mind, that in order to reduce the temperature of the world by limiting or abolishing the production of CO2, is a horrendously
           expensive task world wide.

12. 12. 2. This attempt in itself, regardless of what the climate is doing, can only lead to disastrous rises in the cost of energy which in turn will lead
           to economic collapse of world economies along with of course disastrous effects
           on the world populace (AKA starvation). (Yup I majored in economics – class of 1981 – and for me this is easy to see).

12. 12. 3. You see, our economies are based on fossil energy, Coal, Gas and Oil etc and unless equally or less expensive substitutes are found,
           without these things, most of us will starve and/or freeze to death.

12. 12. 4. But perhaps, as you are no doubt postulating in your mind, should we actually need to save the planet, maybe the above cost will be
           worthwhile?

12. 12. 5. So be sure, no matter what your beliefs are, be assured that, at the very least, trying to cool the planet is a very serious thing to
           attempt. Therefore we should not go down this road unless we have absolute proof that humans are warming
           the planet and that the predictions we are hearing from some sources are
           scientifically confirmed.

12. 12. 12. 6. 6. Fortunately, there is a scientific method which allows us to decide whether the above is true or not. If you read Karl Popper and if you wish to take it even further, William of Ockham, you can find the basis of the scientific disproof of a hypothesis. This quick video will help. Richard Feynman on Hypothesis or Law

    Click here to open Richard Feynman on Hypothesis or Law in new tab

12. 12. 7. Next: Please study Dr Roy Spencer’s Graph showing Computer Models as well as empirical measurements.
           found on Dr Spencer’s website archive Blogs June 2013) 

12. 12. 8. Apply Richard Feynman’s method to the data on Dr Spencers graph as follows  a) Note that the “73 CLIMATE MODELS” on Dr Spencer’s graph results are all separate hypothesis’. A computer model for climate is simply a series of assumptions about the climate, carbon dioxide and solar energy etc. (The climate and the atmosphere are far too large, complicated and random to enable any but a few basic facts to be included).
           There are many of these models created by a number of institutions. The computer uses these to predict global temperatures for the future. These are the “guesses”, that Richard Feynman mentions
           b) The “OBSERVATIONS” on Dr Spencer’s graph are the facts – Nature,Experiment or observation – described by Richard Feynman. These are observed
           or empirical facts which may or may not support the hypothesis’

12. 12. 9. This is a good example of Popper’s disproval of a hypothesis. To paraphrase Richard Feynman, When one compares the result with a) Nature, b)
           Experiment or c) Observation and the result does not agree, “Its wrong – IN THAT SIMPLE STATEMENT IS THE KEY TO SCIENCE”

 

12. 12. 10. Therefore once you compare the results of the computer models with the observations on Dr Spencer’s graph, it
            is very obvious that the models fall under Feynman’s rejection. (Considering what I describe above at 8 a) this is hardly surprising).

 

12. 12. 11. There is therefore no scientific evidence that the earth is warming, (or cooling), other than what has already been observed throughout
            history.

12. 12. 12. Unfortunately, governments like excuses to issue new laws. As most governments nowadays, (including that of New Zealand), are sliding
            steadily to the left, this unproven “Anthropogenic CO2 causes Global Warming” hypothesis, gives many governments around the world an excuse to issue more
            laws and regulations based on these unreliable computer models – each of which we must obey at the cost of trading a little of our freedom and democracy.

 

12. 12. 13. It is easily understood how difficult it is to give up beliefs that one has accumulated, but one must remain logical and scientific in these things.

12. 12. 14. However -Make no mistake, What I have described here is REAL SCIENCE.  If you cannot get a similar explanation from some other site or some sort of rally or from someone is calling you a “denier” and tries to shut you down – they are the denier(s)! – DENIER(S) of SCIENCE.