Thought of the Day 02.12.10

One of the basic pillars of science is the idea that any hypothesis must make predictions which can be falsified by subsequent evidence. This is called being falsifiable. In contrast, if any data at all can be made to fit into the hypothesis, then it’s unscientific and essentially empty of content. This distinction offers one tool for differentiating between good science and, say, propaganda.

Consider global warming. For the last few years, people have said hot temperatures are evidence man is ruining the world. But now that we are experiencing very low temperatures and extremely powerful winter storms in the Northeast, they are saying this, too, is evidence man is ruining the world.

Now logically, it’s possible their claims are right. The world isn’t always simple. But I’m always a bit suspicious of advocates who appeal to common sense when it suits them only to then ignore it when it causes them difficulties. And in this case, I feel like their own efforts to support global warming claims with warm temperatures are responsible for training me to think that cold weather would qualify as disproof.