The scientific test of alternate theories is how well they account for observed data.
Theory 1 (aka Al Gore's hockey stick): Increases in CO2 emissions are causing the earth's average temperature to rise at an accelerating rate.
Theory 2 (aka the Null hypothesis): CO2 emissions are not causing the earth's temperature to rise.
Observed data:
1. Between 1998 and 2012 the global economy more than doubled in size—to some $71 trillion in GDP from $30 trillion. Over the same period the world pumped more than 100 billion tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.
2. During that period global surface temperatures have remained essentially flat.
Which hypothesis better explains the results that have been observed?
Now, the observed data does not prove or disprove either hypothesis, and it is entirely possible that the next 14 year sample will yield results that are more consistent with Theory 1, but as of now, it is the Null hypothesis that is supported by true scientific method.
No comments:
Post a Comment