rod mclaughlin

You can't make it up XX - do climate scientists know what the word 'falsifiable' means? (25 dec 12)

Christopher Monckton is a laugh. He's a British aristocrat with a background in science who goes around the world challenging climate "science". His latest stunt was to show up at the UN climate talks in Doha dressed as Lawrence of Arabia. Noticing Myanmar hadn't shown up, he sat at their podium and claimed that global warming has stopped for 16 years:

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/12/25/bethlehem-and-the-rat-hole-problem/

He throws in the phrase "Popper-falsifiable". You either know what that means, or you don't. I do. I don't see how he shows that the official climate party line is unfalsifiable. It is clear, however, that most people who promote global warming don't even know what it means.

I remember when I first began to doubt the party line. The climate scientists predicted that global warming would cause Britain either to get warmer, or to get colder. (Warming could melt Greenland, which would flood the N Atlantic with cold water). I thought "er, isn't that unfalsifiable?". Whatever happens, the scientists could claim they were right. In normal science, if it can be shown that any part of your claims are unfalsifiable, you're dead in the water. But climate science isn't normal science.

http://www.rodmclaughlin.com/climate-change-deniers-should-die 02/19/09

(I thought that title was obviously a joke when I wrote it. Since then, several warm-mongers have advocated death for skeptics).