Global Warming: Lessons in Epistemology (and Sociology)
Climate, Carbon, and Corruption
I see likely epistemological errors in the reasoning of some who have been alarming others by their science-based predictions related to theories of
Man-Induced Global Warming
1) The predictions are based on models that are incomplete. They lack mechanisms that are known to be lacking. (Models include no mechanism to explain 200 plus years of Cows and Pigs in Greenland or Ancient Tree Stumps in regions too cold for such trees to grow today.
2) There seems in
some environmental sciences a tacit belief that adding tune-able parameters, known to engineers as "fudge-factors," into the modeling, without solving the core incompleteness, makes for better modeling.
John von Neumann's Elephant, at the beginning of the computer era, warned that the opposite can be true.
In addition to flaws of an epistemological nature, the public expressions of the theories seem unclear about some facts, such as these:
1) Carbon dioxide is released by oceans as they warm.
2) CO2 is one of the best radiators of heat.
3) As atmospheric CO2 increases, the radiation of heat from the upper parts of the air's Hadley Cells must be increasing -- and this must make a COOLING contribution to total heat-transfer.
So, the increase in Earth's temperature might be due to the same unknown mechanism, Medieval Climate Mechanism MCM, behind the warming and cooling of the Medieval Warm Period. The increase in atmospheric CO2 is partly due to increasing temperature and partly due to Industry.
The flaws in the science seem so obvious and so strong that one is led to speculate about the susceptibility of "scientists" to "extraordinary popular delusions" and "the madness of crowds."
These thoughts are explored in
You might also like: