REAL SCIENCE OF NOTE

One of the areas of study at the Research Institute for Unlawful Knowledge is Global Climate and I like to share some of the real science from time to time. We don't necessarily draw conclusions from the data because we believe that all experiments should be fully repeatable using independent data gathered from realities common to all.

That said, the alchemists of our times have failed to scare me and this is mostly due to the kind of straight stick science used in the article above. I also like the comments with the article. It is sad to see so-called Science magazines (online and in print) eliminating their comments sections and pruning out letters and comments from those termed denialists. Real scientific progress has been measured over the bodies of Luddites and of those captured by the brilliance of a theory that is resoundingly proven to be false years later when subjected to the actual scientific method which goes a hell of a lot further than mere peer review.

Science is repeatable. If it cannot be repeated it really should be relegated to the closet next to Cold Fusion.

 In just my lifetime every single study of food and diet that blamed some food product for health issues has been found to be based on fantasy. The "SCIENCE" wasn't there after all. Every one of them was trumpeted from the rooftops and followed in the press as if it was real science. So it is with the CLIMATE. Those with models and those who like models are standing pat on their models even if not one of them can replicate reality. That's an interesting proposition for a scientist to take and it speaks poorly of them that the popular scientific journals and newspapers are so confounded by counterclaims that they have elected to simply turn a blind eye to the disagreeable scientists and their theories.