2025-07-11
I suppose that the best candidate for "****" is "unproven".
In which case we are seriously abusing our children by indoctrinating them in unproven but terrifying climate dogma in our schools.
Lots of climate models (funded by all the usual suspects) do not add up to a body of science. Even if some are right, they are not proof of anything other than man's ability to delude itself by admiring it's own efforts.
Complex they may be and undoubtedly are, but a mastery of complexity does not of itself indicate "science", just as assertions by politicians do not necessarily indicate reliability of outcome. Professor Ferguson's Covid models should have dispelled that myth back in 2020.
Look up the scientific method.
Even generally accepted science can be overturned by new research, particularly into observed facts that don't seem to comply with the existing accepted theory.
So is "climate science" (NB: probably the most complex system known to man!) really settled?
And are all the ruinous "green" policies so assiduously pushed on us by global national and local government politicians (aided and abetted by innumerable NGOs with seemingly inexhaustible sources of funding) really going to lead us to a green utopia?
Can you name one major government initiative that has ended up meeting its stated objectives?
How is Ed Milliband's grand projet faring in delivering its promised cost cuts?
Might we not have anticipated that failure would be inevitable once we realised that we were transitioning from fossil fuels (which being heavily taxed were a source of income to the exchequer) to renewables (which being heavily subsidised are a drain on the exchequer and not yet showing any sign of outgrowing their need for subsidy)?
Let's just say that the omens are not propitious.
More at Climate Discussion Nexus. We might as well enjoy our chuckles wherever we can find them.
