Scientific Consensus: Earth’s Climate is Warming?

Bill Lockwood

Government-funded NASA claims that 97 percent or more of “actively publishing climate
scientists agree” that there are “climate warming trends” over the past century and are
“extremely likely” due to human activities. 1 “In addition, most of the leading scientific
organizations worldwide have issued public statements endorsing this position.”

It is unfortunate that much of the scientific community has become so politicized, but
anyone familiar with the takeover of the scientific community by evolutionary philosophy
will understand it. It is also why the country’s leaders, such as president Joe Biden and
former president Barack Obama, have crafted policies to destroy the free market.

It is also an example of what gets publicized, depending upon who is holding the news
microphone. “But the fact is, there is no consensus in the scientific community over
Climate Change. A U.S. Senate majority report says more than 650 scientists express
dissent over man-made global warming claims.”

In addition, over 30,000 scientists have signed on to a petition that says there is
no convincing evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane or other
greenhouse gasses causes or will … cause catastrophic heating of the Earth’s
atmosphere and disruption of the Earth’s climate. 2

So, instead of the Barack Obama’s of the world pontificating that “the debate is over”
regarding human-caused climate change—as he did in a State of the Union
address—the public needs to know that there never has been any real debate on the
issue. This brings us to the real question.

What is Science?

Science is physical observation, hypothesis, and experimentation to test the hypothesis.
It also includes the ability to reproduce the results. This has nothing to do with how
many scientists believe a certain thing. One scientist in a laboratory can overturn an
entire “belief system” of a scientific community.

The late Michael Crichton, who had an earned a medical degree from Harvard Medical
School in 1969, spoke in 2003 at California Institute of Technology at Pasadena, CA.
Pointing out that “consensus” has nothing to do with science, but is a only a justification
for shutting down opposite ideas not associated with their beliefs.

I regard consensus science as an extremely pernicious development that ought
to be stopped cold in its tracks. Historically, the claim of consensus has been the first refuge of scoundrels; it is a way to avoid debate by claiming that the matter
is already settled. Whenever you hear the consensus of scientists agrees on
something or other; reach for your wallet, for you’re being had.

Let’s be clear: the work of science has nothing whatever to do with consensus.
Consensus is the business of politics. Science, on the contrary, requires only one
investigator who happens to be right, which means that he or she has results that
are verifiable by reference to the real world. In science consensus is irrelevant.
What are relevant are reproducible results. The greatest scientists in history are
great precisely because they broke with the consensus. There is no such thing
as consensus science. If it’s consensus, it isn’t science. If it’s science, it isn’t
consensus, period.

Dr. James D. Bales, long-time professor of Bible at Harding University in Searcy,
Arkansas, made the same point pertaining to the Creation v. Evolution controversy. “If
to be accepted by scientists” [or any number or percentage of them] he noted, “is all that
is meant to establish something scientifically, then the only scientific method would be
to count heads.” Exactly what NASA has done.

“If more scientists accept a position than reject it, the minority has been outvoted and
the scientific truth is whatever the majority says it is.” However, this in turn means that
all the talk about framing a hypothesis, the testing of the hypothesis by the
scientific method, the retesting of the hypothesis by another, and the significance
of prediction is just so much ritualistic talk and is unrelated to science. If enough
scientists can be persuaded, regardless of that means of persuasion, that a
certain position is true, the position has been confirmed scientifically.

“Consensus science”, by which is meant, how many scientists believe something, is not
science at all. It is in reality, “consensus among scientists,” which establishes nothing
scientifically. Scientists believed at one time the earth was flat; they believed that Jews
were inferior peoples, some today believe in spontaneous generation—that life comes
from non-life; many believe in natural selection and mutation and that species change
based upon inherited characteristics. None of these have been established scientifically.

Scientific consensus is worthless in establishing facts of science.

1 Scientific Consensus: Earth’s Climate is Warming, Climate.nasa.gov.
2 Tom DeWeese, American Policy Center, 2-4-21.