Carl’s Conservative Corner

What about the SCIENCE?

Last time I discussed my view of the motives and the end game behind the clamor of Climate Change.  Today let’s discuss the science.  No, I am not a climate scientist.  However, I do consider myself a scientist.  While growing up I followed America’s developing space program very closely.  I developed a hobby as a model rocketeer and built and flew at least 2 dozen model rockets.  The Estes Company in Penrose, CO was the leading supplier in those days.  I built and flew several of my own designs and developed an interest in engineering.  I later earned a Bachelor of Science in engineering from the Colorado School of Mines, so I think I can still label myself as a scientist.

The science training I completed included laboratory test work, involving performing experiments and reporting the results.  When reporting the test results we were taught that it was not proper to EXTRAPOLATE the test results BEYOND the range that the test was conducted.  As example if a test involved measuring a reaction at 4 different temperatures, you would strictly report your findings as applicable between the lowest and highest temperature that the test work was performed and measured.  To claim you could predict how the reaction would perform beyond this limit was earn you a mark down by the professor.  This type of prediction or claim is called extrapolating the results beyond the range tested.

Fast forward to today.  EVERY climate model (and there are dozens of models) is an EXTRAPOLATION of the data, for no one can repeat a test and verify the results. One can only measure the model against new climate data and compare the results. For what I have been able to decipher, none of the models compare very well and are constantly being adjust.  I can’t see implementing a huge cultural shift and zillions of tax dollars on a prediction process that needs continual modifications.

A second point for today’s discussion is one of measurement error.  We know this by the computer term “Garbage in Garbage Out”   The afore mentioned models rely upon thousands of remote, often unattended thermometers scattered about the globe, including on the oceans.  In my industrial experience involving electronic remotely sending thermometers, if we did not perform a regularly scheduled calibration check on about a monthly basis, the reading these instruments provided would drift and would recalibrated.  Unless someone has additional information, I do not think these thousands of remotely sending thermometers used as the basis for the climate models are ever checked for sensor drift or recalibrated.  Therefore, when it is frequently reported that the earth’s temperature increased by a number (that is typically fractions of a degree), I roll my scientific eyes, knowing that the report does not follow sound scientific principles and should be ignored.

This is my perspective of the SCIENCE.

If you would like to comment, please use social media channels.