Daniel writes in to ask a climate question: how can James possibly think that “climate change is a hoax”? James responds in the most succinct way possible. Buckle up, folks!
First, we’ll need to define our terms, so we’ll have to determine what the average global temperature is and how it’s measured:
Then we’ll have to examine the temperature record to make sure we have an accurate dataset to work from:
And then we’ll have to deal with any anomalies presented by the data in that record:
And, of course, we’ll have to present that data accurately:
Then we’ll have to listen to actual environmental scientists about the usefulness of the anthropogenic global warming hypothesis to the work of actually preserving natural ecosystems:
And we should also talk to scientists about the models that form the backbone of our ability to forecast the impact of our actions:
We should also keep in mind the politicization of the message and how that interferes with such forecasts:
While not forgetting how the nature of science is itself transformed by the perception of crisis:
We should also make sure that we are in fact dealing with science and not pseudoscience by clearly stating, and then testing, a falsifiable hypothesis:
And we should keep in mind the other political agendas that could be at play here:
You should also find out more about the IPCC and how they compile their infamous report:
And you’ll have to address the fact that 95% of Scientists all believe in global warming!
And answer why anyone would lie about climate change. I mean we all know that the big oil companies covered this up for decades, right
But what about climate scientists? Why would they lie?
What? Do you mean to say big oil actually supports the transformation of the global economy on the back of the global warming lie? How does that work?
Need I go on?…