Sunday, October 2, 2016

FEATURE ARTICLES. CLIMATE CHANGE AND GLOBAL WARMING- FIGHTING THE WRONG BATTLES. PT 3.


Alright, we have Defined the Subject Matter to be Debated, and we have TWO DISTINCT OPINIONS THAT RUN CONTRARY TO EACH OTHER.  Since They both cannot be ACCURATE AND TRUE, HOW DO WE SET UP THE DEBATE TO ARRIVE AT THE MOST LIKELY CONCLUSION?


2-  WHAT TYPE OF EVIDENCE WILL BE CONSIDERED RELEVANT, AND HOW WILL ITS ACCURACY AND INFLUENCE UPON THE SUBJECT MATTER BE MEASURED?

Remember, this is a DEBATE ABOUT SCIENCE, NOT POLITICS OR MORALITY.  ACCEPTING ONE SIDE, OR THE OTHER SIDE AS TRUE, CANNOT BE JUDGED BY POLITICAL, SOCIAL, OR ECONOMIC CONSIDERATIONS.

If We Take the CLIMATE CHANGE/ GLOBAL WARMING DISCUSSION OR DEBATE AS AN EXAMPLE, WE HAVE THE FOLLOWING:

Whether or Not the EARTHS CLIMATE IS CHANGING, AND/OR GLOBAL WARMING IS FACTUAL, DOES NOT DEPEND UPON THE CURRENT COMMERCIAL RELATIONS AND TRADING PRACTICES BETWEEN COUNTRIES. POSSIBLE ECONOMIC UPHEAVAL WILL NOT ALTER PAST READINGS ON TEMPERATURE CHANGE, ATMOSPHERIC PHENOMENA, OR WEATHER ANOMALIES.

Since We  Must Use LOGIC AND THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD TO REACH CONCLUSIONS ABOUT CLIMATE CHANGE AND GLOBAL WARMING, QUALITY EVIDENCE OR TESTIMONY MUST BE;

-  VERIFIABLE.

-  QUANTIFIABLE.

-  TESTABLE.

-  REPRODUCIBLE.

-  FALSIFIABLE. 

PROPER CONTROLS MUST HAVE ALSO BEEN USED TO ELIMINATE THE 
POSSIBILITY OF ALTERING OR TAINTING THE RESULTS.

SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC CONSIDERATIONS ARE LEFT UNTIL AFTER THE
DEBATE OR DISCUSSION HAS BEEN SETTLED, AND A VALID CONSENSUS
AGREES WITH THE FINDINGS.

Date- 11/25/2015.