UPDATE 1145, Saturday 30 January: 300 scientists demand NOAA stop hiding its data – see below
So called “climate science” is not science. Science is a process typically involving controlled experiments to isolate a single variable in an effort to get the best answer to a specific question.
This is not as straightforward as it sounds. For example, I was recently co-author of a paper that criticised the data and conclusions drawn from a series of pasture fertility experiments. Our critique was in turn criticised in a follow-up paper.
This critique of the critique will no doubt receive further criticism and so it goes in all fields of science—science is a rigorous and relentless refinement of knowledge in an effort to determine the best answer to a question.
Contrast this with “climate science” that starts with a conclusion and only seeks evidence that supports that conclusion. The “Climategate” email scandal in 2009 revealed that top climate “scientists” around the world were collaborating to manipulate data, subvert the peer review process and control what information was published.
Since then nothing has changed. Attacks on anyone who questions aspects of the alleged “settled science” of human-caused global warming have intensified. This is perhaps the most compelling evidence that “climate science” is something other than science—increasingly we are seeing calls to make criticism a criminal offence. Think about the implications of making it a crime to question.
If not science, what is “climate science”? It is a political ideology movement that has effectively sold itself as being a scientific endeavour. Don’t be fooled into thinking it is anything other than political activism.
Again, consider that climate “scientists” are not seeking the best answer to a question—they are seeking no questions to their answer.
UPDATE 1145, Saturday 30 January:
As this letter is published, a group of 300 sceptical scientists have demanded in a public letter that National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) scientists comply with NOAA’s own rules concerning the quality of their data. This is not happening in any other branch of science. Why does anyone tolerate it?
But there’s no doubt the pressure against climate activism is increasing and we can all add to it.