They don' need no stinkin' evidence!!!
They have the amniotic warmth of the mob's embrace!
And, of course, 'science' doesn't mean the same thing to government school grads as it does to us.
"In academia, truth has fallen in priority to ideology, also known as the ‘greater truth’ of pre-formed conclusions. A case in point is climate change. Normal science discovers facts, and then constructs a theory from those facts. ‘Post-modern science’ starts with a theory that is politically sensitive, and then makes up facts to influence opinion in its favor."
Melanie Phillips, “The World Turned Upside Down.”
Thank you for demonstrating that you don't understand the difference between a theory and a hypothesis. That home school religious brain washing you got sure did you a lot of good.
OK, OK....stop begging: I'll explain science to you:
Steps of the Scientific Method
- Make an Observation. Scientists are naturally curious about the world. ...
- Form a Question. After making an interesting observation, a scientific mind itches to find out more about it. ...
- Form a Hypothesis. ...
- Conduct an Experiment. ...
- Analyse the Data and Draw a Conclusion.
Scientific Method Steps – The Scientific Method – School of Dragons
That's nice honey, but you already demonstrated that you don't understand the difference between a theory and a hypothesis. Your parents did you a real disservice.
Sooo....you still can't grasp what science is?
See if this helps:
In the words of Melanie Phillips, (The World Turned Upside Down), “we have a doctrine of mandated intellectual mendacity.”
a. Mike Hulme is Professor of Climate Change in the
School of Environmental Sciences at the
University of East Anglia (UEA), [
Mike Hulme] and was good enough to reveal the truth in the Guardian, 2007:
“…this particular mode of scientific activity… has been labeled
"post-normal" science. Climate change seems to fall in this category. Disputes in post-normal science focus as often on the process of science - who gets funded, who evaluates quality, who has the ear of policy - as on the facts of science….
Self-evidently dangerous climate change will not emerge from a normal scientific process of truth seeking,… scientists - and politicians - must trade (normal) truth for influence.
If scientists want to remain listened to, to bear influence on policy, they must recognise the social limits of their truth seeking and reveal fully the values and beliefs they bring to their scientific activity….
Climate change is too important to be left to scientists - least of all the normal ones.” The appliance of science.
¬
So global warming theory did not seek to establish the truth through evidence. Instead, truth had to be traded for influence: scientists presented beliefs as a basis for policy. The shame:
science has been junked in the interest of promoting ideological conviction.
Get it now, you dunce?????