Quote:
Originally Posted by oil pan 4
Not solar wind, more like the lack there of. But you are right about it not having anything to do with global warming.
And we are going to start learning a whole lot more about the sun, in an up close and personal kind of way.
Scientists make lots of assumptions. Normally they test and peer review these assumptions, unless it has anything to do with global warming, then they just skip the testing and peer review part.
|
*Science came into existence in the wake of what David Wootton describes as 'killer facts.'
*The discovery of the New World in 1492 was a 'miracle.''impossible'
*In 1536,Marcello Palingenio Stellato published a satirical attack on the Vatican,and after death,his body was dug up by the 'Church',posthumously condemned,and his remains burned.
*In 1543,Vesalius' anatomical investigations wounded Galen's authority in anatomy mortally.
*Tycho Brahe's 1572 discovery of his nova proved the fallibility of god.
*The appearance of the 1577 comet was another blow to the 'Church.'
*In 1600 Giordano Bruno was burned at the stake by the 'Church' for saying that stars were suns,that the Sun was a star,that there could be extraterrestrial life,and that the Earth,Moon and planets shone by reflected sunlight.
One can go on and on.
By around 1661,facts started to displace authority and science took off.
Scientists observe phenomena,postulate hypotheses which might explain the phenomena (theory),then construct an experiment to confirm or reject the validity of the theory,based upon empirical observations directly witnessed.
Then they publish their results.Others are free to duplicate the methodology of the experiment and see what results they produce.If they reach the same result,then its a corroboration.
That's pretty much all they do.Even climatologists.