"The Science Is Proven"

The impetus for today's argument comes from an article by Christopher Booker of The Telegraph (UK). It also come from such notable other times throughout history when "the science is proven" has been shouted from the rooftops.

For instance:

1. The earth is the center of the universe
2. Four humors control the human body
3. Blacks are genetically inferior
4. The moon is made of cheese
5. The earth is flat
6. We can actually prove the big bang occurred

Sadly, only one of those has not been asserted as proven science throughout the course of human history.  Men (and women) are far more interested in proving the next big thing, which may not even exist, almost as much as they are interested in the government funding that goes along with their "discoveries".  The problem with that is actual, real science is often thrown out the window as fame and fortune is chased.

The amount of 'knowledge' we have regarding global climate change is likely still in its nascent stage.  I say that not as a scientist, but as an observer of the world, and with at least an average amount of intelligence.  The world is between 10,000 and 15,000,000,000 years old, depending on your belief system.  At the outside, we may have reliable records for approximately 1,000 years (I'd say that figure is closer to 300 years, but that is insignificant in the grand scheme of things.)  There is no way in the world, even with all of the technological advances we've made in the last 150 years that we can reliably determine anything outside of that time period, and as our weather forecasters are wont to show us, predicting anything more than 7-10 in to the future is a guess, too.

This is not to say that there is not good science going on with regard to the changes are climate has undergone, and may continue to undergo.  Nicholas Lewis has more knowledge about climate change factors in his little pinky than I do in my whole body, but I put myself in *good* company there, because none of our politicians who are creating laws and vast new bureaucracies to combat a problem we don't even know exists yet.  Make no mistake, the reason for all of the pseudo-science that goes on in Washington, D.C. is strictly financial.  Always follow the money.  Al Gore knew how to rabble-rouse to the tune of tens of millions of dollars (while being one of the biggest propagators of carbon emissions going) and a Nobel Prize in 2007.  He never let science get in the way of his ability to earn a dollar.

The fact remains- we know so little about how how our Earth works, let alone how the cosmos and other places far off affect our day-to-day life.  Actual scientists are collecting that data, and at some future time, they may know what is going on, but we have not reached that point yet.  The science, despite what you may have heard on Pennsylvania Avenue, is not proven.  There is still much to learn, and no amount of rhetoric makes that so.  Neither does withholding federal emergency preparedness monies to states that do not kowtow to your way of thinking.  In fact, I would think that such a policy would serve to prove the point that the science is not settled, so you are using political power to brow beat others in to supporting your belief system.  How very scientific of you.  Don't engage in debate, simply postulate and wave at bleating sheep, while our economic world grinds to a halt.

For a fun-to-read guide on how one could actually go about destroying the Earth, I suggest reading Sam Hughes' blog How to Destroy the Earth. Small spoiler:  raising the global temperature by 2 degrees Celsius doesn't make the list.  In fact, if you read far enough down, you may come to the understanding that warmer temperatures may save the Earth, after all.