LETTER: A physicist’s view of climate change

Print Article

Aztec priests told people they must cut out their beating hearts to bring better climate for their crops. The people believed them.

Today’s climate priests tell people they must cut out their CO2 emissions and pay penances to other nations, like China, to save our climate. The people believe them.

It’s time for you to think for yourself.

I will show you physics “secrets” that will change everything you “believe” about climate.

The real climate debate is about the scientific method. This is the critical “philosophy” part of science that most people and many scientists do not understand.

To help us understand the scientific method, let’s drop in on a fictitious federal murder trial in San Francisco.

Federal criminal court procedures are similar to the scientific method. The prosecution needs a unanimous vote by the jury. Only one “Not Guilty” vote defeats the prosecution’s case.

The prosecution accuses Smith of shooting and killing Jones.

The prosecution enters evidence to support its case. Smith owns a gun similar to the gun that killed Jones. Smith once publicly threatened Jones. Etc. The evidence looks bad for Smith. The prosecution rests.

Does the defense try to refute all the prosecution’s evidence? It does not need to. The defense only needs one contradiction to the prosecution’s case to win. The defense proves Smith was in New York at the time of the shooting. Game over.

The scientific method works the same way. You may propose an idea, like our CO2 causes dangerous climate change. You may show evidence to support your idea. But the defense only needs to show your idea has one mistake or one incorrect prediction to prove your idea is wrong.

Some alarmists claim their idea is true because of a “preponderance of evidence.” This is not the scientific method and it leads to the wrong conclusion.

The scientific method says we can never prove an idea is true. We only can prove an idea is false. To approach truth, we discard fiction. Since we can never discard all fiction, science is never settled.

Let’s drop in on another fictitious trial.

The prosecution claims human CO2 emissions cause climate change. The prosecution introduces the following evidence:

• Humans have burned carbon-based fuels in meaningful quantities since 1950.

• Global temperatures have been mostly rising since 1950.

• Climate models embody the alarmist idea.

• Climate models predict human CO2 will cause future temperature rise.

• Consequences are dangerous sea levels, hurricanes, etc.

Looks bad for CO2 but let’s hear from the defense.

The defense requests dismissal of consequential evidence, like sea levels, because consequences do not prove causation. The judge agrees. Consequential evidence dismissed.

The defense calls its witnesses.

Dr. Richard Feynman, Nobel laureate in physics, explains the scientific method. You get an idea or hypothesis. You use your idea to make a prediction. If your prediction is wrong, your idea is wrong.

Dr. Albert Einstein testifies we must compare predictions of climate models to new data. Einstein’s relativity idea predicted our sun’s gravity would bend light from a star by a precise amount. Einstein said of the scientific method, “Many experiments may prove me right but it takes only one to prove me wrong.”

Dr. John Christy compares climate model predictions since 1979 with real data. Climate models do not agree among themselves, and the model average predicts global temperature will increase three times faster than recorded climate data. This inaccuracy is like missing your deer shot by three deer lengths. Both points prove the models are wrong.

The judge pounds the gavel.

Like Smith, human CO2 is innocent.

Our CO2 does not control climate. CO2 is not a pollutant. Carbon is not a pollutant.

The best way to “address” climate change is to do nothing.


Berry, of Bigfork, has a Ph.D. in physics, is a certified consulting meteorologist, and a former program manager for weather modification for the National Science Foundation. Read more at edberry.com.

Print Article

Read More Letters to the Editor

Letters to the editor for May 23, 2018

May 23, 2018 at 5:00 am | Daily Inter Lake Beringer for sheriff “Now is the time for all good men to come to the aid of their county.” Well, actually, the original sentence in old typing classes had “country,” but this works better for this ...

Comments

Read More

Letters to the editor for May 22, 2018

May 22, 2018 at 5:23 pm | Daily Inter Lake Brodehl has experience to be commissioner I had the honor of serving in the Montana Legislature with Randy Brodehl. He served four terms in the House of Representatives representing the Evergreen an...

Comments

Read More

Letters to the editor for May 20, 2018

May 20, 2018 at 5:00 am | Daily Inter Lake Support for McDonald in Lake County race My “Coffee with Caroline” event was a blast! This happened on the morning of May 10. I had asked for this meeting because of some things I’d read and my sinc...

Comments

Read More

Countdown to county elections

May 20, 2018 at 5:00 am | Daily Inter Lake Brodehl for county commissioner Randy Brodehl is clearly the most qualified in the commissioner race. Randy has a great reputation for knowing finances and being on top of the numbers all eight yea...

Comments

Read More

Contact Us

(406) 755-7000
727 East Idaho
Kalispell, MT 59901

©2018 Daily Inter Lake Terms of Use Privacy Policy
X
X