Remember me
▼ Content

AGW is a hypothesis that's never been tested


AGW is a hypothesis that's never been tested23-12-2013 20:46
aloysious
☆☆☆☆☆
(1)
Hey, I'm new here and this is my first post.
Anyway, AGW is not a theory because it's never gotten past the hypothesis stage.
It can't be tested because there's no way to have a control group which is needed to experimentally test a hypothesis.
Therefore, there's no way to definitively state to what degree man has contributed to GW.
06-01-2014 13:07
Liam1156
☆☆☆☆☆
(2)
You are absolutely correct! AGW is being treated as a fact when it has not been tested to a degree to which we can call it a theory.
02-06-2014 16:15
Windy
☆☆☆☆☆
(6)
But, you get to keep your doctor.
23-11-2014 05:46
Abraham3Profile picture★★☆☆☆
(256)
Would such a conclusion not also apply to all theories concerning our sun, other planets and the rest of the universe?

Can you show me in any of the classic explanations of the scientific method where it says that it's mandatory to have a control?
23-11-2014 13:46
Abraham3Profile picture★★☆☆☆
(256)
Obviously a control provides great value to an experiment. I am not attempting to say otherwise. But the climate as a whole is not the only situation in which providing a control is impractical. And a large number of experiments simulating certain limited conditions in the atmosphere can and have been conducted under laboratory settings and have made use of controls. An experiment in a lab with a small number of controllable and observable parameters will garner information - meaningful data - far more efficiently than will observations in situ featuring a near infinitude of uncontrollable, unobservable and occasionally unknowable parameters.

Obviously, many of that multitude of parameters will have some influence on the outcome of processes taking place in Earth's climate. But our knowledge of those processes will be increased by laboratory experiments involving controlled conditions parametrically recreating conditions under study. Knowledge of the functions and process of climate is not unattainable. Perfect knowledge is, but that is the case throughout all of the natural sciences. Do not make the mistake of demanding proof where it is not physically possible to obtain or failing to act on strong indications due to that lack.
10-12-2014 13:56
Abraham3Profile picture★★☆☆☆
(256)
And, hey, you do get to keep your doctor. You just might have to pay for him.




Join the debate AGW is a hypothesis that's never been tested:

Remember me

Related content
ThreadsRepliesLast post
If you believe in the AGW concept and want change but you909-01-2019 22:30
What exactly is the evidence that AGW is happening or609-01-2019 10:33
Serious question, is there any data on how many people that believe in AGW106-01-2019 21:35
The Argument for AGW6415-01-2018 23:52
No AGW Conspiracy?122-09-2017 09:16
▲ Top of page
Public Poll
Who is leading the renewable energy race?

US

EU

China

Japan

India

Brazil

Other

Don't know


Thanks for supporting Climate-Debate.com.
Copyright © 2009-2019 Climate-Debate.com | About | Contact