Scientific omissions
Summary omissions
What is wrong with predictions of scientists about climate change. Well to mention the most important:
- The calculations are probabilistic
- Are only based on records of the last 100 years
- Assumptions are based in ideas
- The most important ingredients are missing i.e.: equilibrium, non linearity and the tipping point.
- The contrary can not be proven i.e.: is not scientific
- The human social bubble is not taken in consideration.
The calculations are probabilistic
Meaning estimation .
Are only based on records of the last 100 years
Hoe can you base predictions on evens which did not happen in the previous 100 year or so. This is what scientists do. But the most comparable events happen during some of the five mass extinctions millions of years ago.
Science calls the current climate change the sixth mass extinction. Why do they not look what happened at the previous mass extinctions and include it in their predictions?
Assumptions are based in ideas
Assumptions are based in ideas and hence incomplete, the environment is too complex
Similar records climate change.
Records past centenaries.
What happened at mass extinctions.
The climate change predictions of the main stream scientists are based on what happened in the last 100 year, when no other mass extension occurred. Hence they must be incomplete or some of them must be dead wrong. I assume they know this and apply some ideas how to mitigate this. Scientific sound?
There are a more and more scientists which admit they cannot make prediction anymore based on the current events in nature. They see the thermal runaway but do not understand what is happening.
The most important ingredients are missing
Equilibrium, non linearity and the tipping point
see-saw and atoms -> Equilibrium, non linearity and the tipping point .
[It is remarkable the principle of looking at scientific things from another
prospective is not used with predictions of climate change. This while it is
used in other scientific fields like the sting theory. Here they got stuck when
they try to prove the theory using normal calculations. But when they looked
from another unlikely perspective the calculations became more solvable.]
So things only happen gradually for small things but not for large evens like releasing huge amounts of global warming gases into the atmosphere.
Not scientific provable
The current accepted predictions cannot be tested. Also no proof is provided that there are no other influences which overturn the predictions. This is because a similar global climate change did not take place in the last few centuries.
Social bubble
People will not change because they cannot see beyond their social bubble. Logically, this has come about through natural selection, because otherwise you would have too much information to process .