The Junk Science of Climate Change

'Science is based on three fundamental pillars. The first is fallibility. The fact that you can be wrong, and if so proven by experimental input, any hypothesis can be—indeed, must be—corrected.

This was systematically stymied as early as 2004 by the scientific in-charge of the University of East Anglia’s Climate Change Unit. This university was at the epicentre of the ‘research’ on global warming. It is here that Professor Phil Jones kept inconvenient details that contradicted climate change claims out of reports.

The second pillar of science is that by its very nature, science is impersonal. There is no ‘us’, there is no ‘them’. There is only the quest. However, in the entire murky non-scientific global warming episode, if anyone was a sceptic he was labelled as one of ‘them’. At the very apex, before his humiliating retraction, Pachauri had dismissed a report by Indian scientists on glaciers as “voodoo science”.

The third pillar of science is peer group assessment. This allows for validation of your thesis by fellow scientists and is usually done in confidence. However, the entire process was set aside by the IPCC while preparing the report. Thus, it has zero scientific value.'

- Ninad D Sheth, 'The Hottest hoax in the world'.


Deepali Chandra said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
Deepali Chandra said…
Really a very very interesting post on Science. "Zero scientific value" wonderful terminology..! Most of the theories which were part of our prescribed syllabus had Zero scientific value... Since years together I didnt know how to sum up most of them in simple word i.e. "ZSV" ... :)

Popular Posts