Is “Climate Change” science or pseudoscience?

[rebewranger]

Is “Climate Change” science or pseudoscience?
20 hours ago Andy May 248 Comments
By Andy May

I have a new op-ed in the Washington Examiner today that questions whether “climate change,” as commonly defined today, is a scientific concept. The op-ed is a very brief summary of a longer post on the topic here. The longer post contains all the references and links to supporting material, including a link to Karl Popper‘s famous book on the definitions of science and pseudoscience, called Conjectures and Refutations.

From the op-ed:

“Tornados, nor’easters, hurricanes, mid-winter thaws, 100-degree days, cold snaps, droughts, and flooding creeks all are presented as evidence of human-caused climate change, “proof” that human emissions of carbon dioxide are leading to an overheated planet.


However, Karl Popper, the famous philosopher, would say that these meteorological events do not support human-caused climate change because none of them can falsify the idea. If every event supports an idea, and no event can falsify it, the idea is not a scientific hypothesis

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2022/04/21/is-climate-change-science-or-pseudoscience/

[Fishrrman]

Question:
"Is “Climate Change” science or pseudoscience?"

Neither.
It's political propaganda.
Not to mention it's also the greatest lie and hoax ever foisted upon humanity...

[Smokin Joe]

Well, the climate has been changing for 4.6 billion years, so I guess it does that.
After all, where I am sitting now, there was once a two kilometer thick ice sheet, so some climate change could be a good thing.

But can humans have much of an effect on that change?

Unlikely. A system that has been functioning long before life on Earth, that continues to function, probably isn't influenced much by humans, and will not respond to us giving up our rights or throwing money at it any more than it responded to the bleats of the last mammoth.

The idea that we can give up this, or mandate that and magically get the planet's temperature to comply with someone's arbitrary and capricious concept of "just right" is not only peudo-science, it's ludicrous.

[rebewranger]

Based on "current science" the glaciers which formed the Great Lakes withdrew because of the massive campfires of the scattered few people of the time.  How else could they have gotten enough global warming at the time?

[Free Vulcan]

For CO2 to do what they claim, it would have the powers of magical, rainbow colored, sparkly fairy pixie unicorn dust.

[libertybele]

For CO2 to do what they claim, it would have the powers of magical, rainbow colored, sparkly fairy pixie unicorn dust.

I'm convinced it's definitely because of the sparkly fairy pixie unicorn dust.