A Random Thought on the Scientific Method
In response to this post , climate model skeptic Rick Stryker writes (in ALL CAPS no less):
JUST BECAUSE A MODEL DESCRIBES THE EXISTING DATA DOESNT MEAN THAT IT WILL DESCRIBE DATA THAT HAS NOT BEEN OBSERVED
So far were in agreement; in fact Im going to repeat this point to my econometrics class. He then continues:
You see, in science, you dont prove the theory by showing that it describes the existing observations. You prove the theory by showing that it predicts data that havent been observed.
Well, gee, if this is the standard for proving or disproving hypotheses, either generally, or in econometrics, were not going to get very far. In this view, I wont see our sun go nova, so might as well call it a day science cant proceed until we get the data! But this is the sort of nihilistic worldview that pervades the global climate change deniers.
For a more succinct critique, see below:
A Random Thought on the Scientific Method ,
Tags
Who is online
53 visitors
Just in case the title isn't explicit enough...
... just in case the use of words like "prove the theory" and "the standard for proving or disproving hypotheses" isn't obvious enough...
The topic here is "the scientific method". The topic is NOT climate science.
Thank you.