Dear Friends,
It seems to me, anthropogenic climate change is the definition of pseudo science. The way science works is someone makes a hypothesis. Based on that hypothesis predictions are made. Then experiments or observations are done to see if reality meets prediction. If the prediction comes true the hypothesis becomes a theory. The more predictive a theory and the more unfalsifiable… the more true it’s said to be. Alternatively, the more times a hypothesis is wrong in its predictions, the less it’s science and the more it becomes something else. Pseudo science is often defined as a belief that appears scientific but collapses under the weight of scrutiny. Pseudo science doesn’t make falsifiable predictions. It’s a belief. So, based on these criteria… let’s examine anthropogenic climate change.
Anthropogenic simply means caused by mankind. What they mean to say then is that climate change, warming or cooling, is primarily caused by human action on the planet. Adding carbon dioxide to the air causes the planet to retain heat like a greenhouse or so they say. But regardless if the planet warms as they predicted before, or cools, it’s because of mankind’s actions. Maybe as we burn fossil fuels, the air column gets higher because of the added volume of gas, so the pressure at sea level increases. Basic physics states that an increase in pressure increases heat. That’s how the diesel engine works. This is obviously a pseudo science theory, that an increase in air column increases air pressure, leading to an increase in heat. Just like the idea that an increase in greenhouse gas…
Falsifiability is the cornerstone of any real scientific theory. Indeed a true scientist seeks ways to falsify his or her theories… as a way to prove them. The way it works is someone comes up with an idea. They flesh out the idea into a hypothesis. That hypothesis generates predictions. Those predictions are tested. If they fail to hold up the hypothesis is falsified. If they hold the hypothesis becomes a theory. Those in the camp who say man is causing climate change have made predictions, many of them, and not one has come true. This falsifies the anthropogenic climate change hypothesis. Since any hypothesis that failed in experimentation is falsified. Once adherents cling to it anyway, the hypothesis becomes pseudo science… not actual science, no matter how many people are forced to believe.
Climate change is a paradigm because it’s politically enforced. Those who stray outside the velvet ropes are fired. Moreover, additional falsifying evidence of their religion or pseudo science is forbidden. Why do I say this? Because the censorship around climate change is so heavy. Meanwhile the authoritative body on the subject, the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has been caught in lies, manipulating data, and covering it all up. Even as anyone with authority on the subject is threatened with ostracism for speaking up. Religions guard orthodoxy, science seeks to break it. By trying to break it, they prove it, or move on to a more functional theory. This then is another example of how anthropogenic climate change is a pseudo science or religion not a real science.
So, anthropogenic climate change has made predictions that didn’t come true, it’s enforced by consensus and ostracism instead of rigorous debate, which isn’t allowed. These are qualities of a pseudo science… not real science. When Einstein introduced relativity to add to Newton’s laws, he had tried himself to falsify his hypothesis, and welcomed counter arguments. Meanwhile, anyone challenging the climate change narrative loses their job. Even if they are in a position of influence. That’s not done out of confidence in one’s logic but out of fear of being exposed as a fraud. Those telling the truth have no need of numbers on their side, the truth itself is sufficient. But liars always need numbers to bolster the lie. That’s why they claim consensus… of authorities in other fields.
Sincerely,
John Pepin
