Good news about global warming

[The Green Barbarian]

A lot of the current hogwash that makes up the man-made climate change myth has been compared to what happened with Lysenko in Russia during the Stalin era.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trofim_Lysenko

Just as with Lysenko in Russia, the man-made climate change myth is phony science embraced by the government, who deems it "truth", even if it isn't true, and unleashes a giant tide of government resources which are all wasted on said phony junk science, as the government can't go back on what it said was true, as they'd look like idiots.

[FreeRights]

And yet there are many credible scientists that disagree with you.

[rustled]

And yet there are many credible scientists that disagree with you.

That's fair, and as it should be.

Einstein is credited with telling us a few things about science and certainty.

No amount of experimentation can ever prove me right; a single experiment can prove me wrong.

Seems he was entirely open to having his own theories questioned, and was prepared to discard theories which didn't fit with the results of models and experiments after all.

If this next one is true of mathematics, one can only imagine how science would fare on the "certainty" to "reality" scale:

As far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality, they are not certain; and as far as they are certain, they do not refer to reality.

And to the extent global warming is entwined with politics:

One has to divide one's time between politics and our equations. But our equations are much more important to me, because politics is for the present, while such an equation is for eternity.

It would be interesting to get his take on the current vogues of "settled" science and modern scientists being lumped in as agreeing with popular theory, the wanton disregard for failing models. And I wonder what he would make of the doomsday theorists?

One thing I have learned in a long life: that all our science, measured against reality, is primitive and childlike—and yet is the most precious thing we have.

Childlike and primitive, and yet scientific theories grounded in zealously defended failed doomsday models is currently being used to drive public policy.

This one seems particularly apropos this particular conversation:

Physical concepts are free creations of the human mind, and are not, however it may seem, uniquely determined by the external world. In our endeavour to understand reality we are somewhat like a man trying to understand the mechanism of a closed watch. He sees the face and the moving hands, even hears its ticking, but he has no way of opening the case. If he is ingenious he may form some picture of a mechanism which could be responsible for all the things he observes, but he may never be quite sure his picture is the only one which could explain his observations. He will never be able to compare his picture with the real mechanism and he cannot even imagine the possibility or the meaning of such a comparison. But he certainly believes that, as his knowledge increases, his picture of reality will become simpler and simpler and will explain a wider and wider range of his sensuous impressions. He may also believe in the existence of the ideal limit of knowledge and that it is approached by the human mind. He may call this ideal limit the objective truth.

(I wonder if sensuous was a mis-translation of sensory?) I tend to think if he were here, he'd tell us when it comes to climate science, we're still looking at the face of the watch.

Quotes and their sources are here: http://todayinsci.com/E/Einstein_Albert ... ations.htm