No headline

One of the fundamental problems with much of climate change science is the basic fact that it is not true science. It is only theory.

The word “science” comes from the Latin word scientia, or “knowledge,” and the word “theory” comes from the Greek word theoria, which means to “analyze” or “look at.”

True science is that science which is empirically verifiable. It is something that can be known factually or empirically. According to Wikipedia, “Empirical evidence is information that verifies the truth … or falsity …of a claim. In the empiricist view, one can claim to have knowledge only when based on empirical evidence …” (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empirical_evidence). Empirical evidence, then, is something which can be proven, under laboratory or laboratory-like conditions, to be either true or false.

Climate change science as a whole, however, while being an interesting and controversial theory, is not reproducible under laboratory conditions and is therefore not true science. It is not empirically verifiable. At its best climate change is nothing more than mere speculation. As one weatherman put it, how is it possible for climate change advocates to accurately predict the weather hundreds of years from now when we can’t even give an accurate prediction for tomorrow?

MONTE HEIL

Sagle