Earth's Temperature at Highest Levels in 400 Years

thatguywhoiam writes "Congress asked, and the scientists have answered: 'The Earth is the hottest it has been in at least 400 years, probably even longer. The National Academy of Sciences, reaching that conclusion in a broad review of scientific work requested by Congress, reported Thursday that the 'recent warmth is unprecedented for at least the last 400 years and potentially the last several millennia.'"

Comments

Re:hot air

[InsertCleverUsername]

Not scientifically proven? I don't care what Rush Limbaugh has been telling you... Among scientists that study climatology and related fields there's an overwhelming consensus. Those rare exceptions are typically shills being paid off by Exxon-Mobil. See http://exxonsecrets.com/ and take a look at the ulterior motives of your favorite skeptics.

Re:temperature

[NickFortune]

Stop getting carried away with something that has not been proven scientifically.

Hypothetical question for you, You're crossing a road, first thing in the morning. You're still maybe half asleep, late night and all that.

Suddenly you hear a noise. You look up from your reverie to find there's a huge great truck barrelling down the road toward you, horn blaring.

So what do you do? Do you think "Hmm, this is an rare scenario. The truck could exist, but I also have to consider that I may in fact be still asleep and dreaming this encounter. What data can I collect to determine if actiion is truly warranted in this case?"

Do you do all that, or do you get out of the frigging way first and then run your analysis? I bet I know what most of your ancestors did in analagous situations.

See, the thing is that science never proves anything. That's not a flaw in science, it's methodology. Scientists have long discarded modus ponens as the logical basis for the scientific method, in favour of modus tollens. What that means is that we don't try to prove things, because we recognise that we may not yet have all the facts. Instead we propose a explanation that seem to fit the facts and we try and disprove it.

The thing to note here is that if e wait for science to prove that global is happening, we'll still be waiting in billions of years time. Even if the Sun the should expand to swallow the earth and engulf us solar plasma, we;ll still be waiting, because that's not what scientists, do!

What they do do[1] is get out of the way of oncoming traffic.

If you want to be scientific about this, you need a counter theory, and it has to be falsifiable. There has to be a test we can conduct that to prove it wrong. Preferably one that doesn't involve waiting a thousand years to see if the climate flips state back to the Cambrian Era.

Give me a set of criteria that, if they are satisfied, you will regard as sufficent evidence for taking action against global warming and I will accept that you may have a pont. Otherwise, all you're doing is saying "Bah! Youse scientist dunt never nothing nowhow" only in an fancy accent.

Me, I vote we get out of the way of the truck

[1] On the whole, that is. I'm not counting absent mindedness, scientific tests of experimental traffc-proof suits, or Bruce Banner when he gets angry. I don't really think this weakens my argument.