- “Consensus is the cachet of politics, not science.”
- “It’s not what people think or say that matters in science but what objective reality does.”
- “Consensus doesn’t decide science. The facts do.”
- “The theory of man-induced catastrophic global warming rules out next-to-nothing and tells us next-to-nothing.”
- “The global warming scare is more akin to a modern-day religion than science. “
- “Science doesn’t argue from authority, elected position, or status. It’s the objective world that decides science; not governments.”
From New Zealand’s National Business Review:
The Prime Minister’s Chief Science Adviser, Sir Peter Gluckman, has done us all a favour and provided a textbook illustration of the difference between science and non-science.
His recent report, New Zealand’s Changing Climate and Oceans, boldly predicts an average temperature increase of 2.1 degrees Celsius by 2090. That prediction is the key give-away. It’s not science; it’s prophecy.
Science makes bold and surprising predictions but about the here and now, not a hundred years hence. The difference is that scientific predictions are testable whereas prophecies aren’t.
We won’t know for a hundred years whether Sir Peter’s prediction stacks up and the historical experience with prophecies is that there are always excuses when their time is up.
But that’s not all. The Gluckman Report tiresomely declares there’s scientific consensus for the theory of human-induced catastrophic global warming. But so what? Consensus is the…
View original post 437 more words