And that's the problem. Facts withstand scrutiny and testing and falsification. Judgement of them doesn't change them. Judgement of facts just leads to "alternative facts".
Good. I'm glad you've raised the issue of 'scrutiny, testing and falsification', Phil, because this is the basis of my skepticism regarding the 'hypothesis' that rising levels of that clear, clean and odourless trace gas called CO2, at the current rate, could have catastrophic consequences on the planet's climate.
How is it possible to devise an experiment that could either confirm or falsify such a hypothesis?
This is the issue that I would claim to be right about, that the fundamental requirements for certainty in science is that capacity for testing and falsification. Until that can occur, any theory remains a
hypothesis, open to doubt.
To introduce an association with photography into the discussion, I'm reminded of that ancient Greek theory that we are able to see the objects that surround us because our eyes project a beam of light onto the objects. Even Plato accepted this theory, although Aristotle thought is was bunk.
However, the ancient Greeks hadn't really formulated a methodology of scientific inquiry, so this 'emission' theory of vision persisted for many centuries until an Islamic genius with the name Ibn al-Haytham (or Alhazen), who lived during the 11th century AD, devised a simple experiment using a dark chamber, known in latin as a 'camera obscura'.
"Legend says, one day he saw light shining through a tiny pinhole into his darkened room – projecting an image of the world outside onto the opposite wall. Ibn al-Haytham realized that he was seeing images of objects outside that were lit by the Sun. From repeated experiments he concluded that light rays travel in straight lines, and that vision is accomplished when these rays pass into our eyes.
Ibn al-Haytham confirmed his discovery by experimenting with his 'dark room' (calling it Albait Almuzlim)- translated into Latin as camera obscura, which simply means “dark room”.
After many additional experiments using special apparatus of lenses and mirrors which he built, he laid down his new ideas about light and vision in his seven volumes Book of Optics.
Ibn al-Haytham was born in the year 965 in Basra, and died in about 1040 in Cairo. He was one of the earliest scientists to study the characteristics of light and the mechanism/process of vision. He sought experimental proof of his theories and ideas."
http://www.ibnalhaytham.com/discover/who-was-ibn-al-haytham/So how is this related to climate change?
For many centuries most people accepted the emission, or extramission theory of vision because brilliant minds such as Empedocles and Plato thought it was true. How could such people be wrong? They obviously must know more than I do.
A similar argument is made by those who accept the theory (or more correctly the hypothesis) that human emissions of CO2 will be catastrophic. How can a qualified scientist in the field of climatology, who knows more about climate than I do, be wrong on the issue?
The answer is, in the absence of experimental proof through controlled experiments, using the most rigorous of scientific methods, no-one can rationally claim that either group is right or wrong. I certainly don't claim that all climatologists supporting the CAGW hypothesis are wrong.
The issue for me is the
unscientific degree of certainty expressed about the adverse effects of rising CO2 levels on climate and our future security.
By the way, whilst I was searching for background information on Ibn al-Haytham, I came across some rather shocking reports of research which showed that sometimes even college students still believe in the extramission theory of vision. Isn't that amazing.
I wonder what the average scientifically illiterate adult thinks.
http://people.auc.ca/brodbeck/4007/article7.pdfhttp://www.asa3.org/ASA/education/views/extramission.htm"The authors reviewed research about a profound misconception that is present among college students, namely, the belief that the process of vision includes emanations from the eyes, an idea that is consistent with the extramission theory of perception, which was originally professed by early Greek philosophers and which persisted in scholarly circles for centuries. The authors document the strength and breadth of this phenomenon and the abject failure of traditional educational techniques to overcome this belief, and they reveal that students are leaving psychology courses with a flawed understanding of one of the most studied processes in the history of psychology—visual perception. Some suggestions are offered for overcoming this misconception in traditional college classroom settings."The attached image is of a sketch depicting Alhazen's experiment which falsifies the ancient Greek 'emission' and 'extramission' theories of vision. The beginnings of photography, by a Muslim as well.