Hopefully, we all know about the claims made by advocates for many changes in public policy; who say “Science says manmade global warming will kill us all,” or “Science says banning guns will end crime,” or any of dozens of other advocacy goals.
“Science” says no such thing. Never has, never will.
The scientific method requires a researcher to gather ALL the known facts on a particular phenomena, be it climate or a social issue, let the data lead you where the data may, and formulate a “hypothesis” that explains ALL the known facts on the subject at hand, or satisfactorily explains the unexplained. After review by those considered expert in that field, called “Peer review” the theory is published, along with ALL the original data for other workers to confirm or refute.
The theory that “man made climate change” is in progress is based on misquoted or invented data. For example,some of the “key data” is supposedly derived from a study of Asian tree rings – that no one seems to be able to produce for inspection. Another claim is that atmospheric carbon dioxide levels are far higher than they were a century ago; but air samples sealed in glass since the late 1800’s show atmospheric CO2 levels close to the 400 parts per million the researchers of that period claimed – and that are close to today’s atmospheric CO22 levels. And, to mention a third problem with “global warming,” the official temperature records for the past 200 years has been “adjusted” to bring the record in line with that necessary to prove the theory.
So the key data to prove change either does not prove anything, proves no significant change, or proves cliimate change fraud.
To take a second example, gun control, the very first step in the Scientific Method is to gather all the data. But try to find a study or an editor who has gathered any data! The editor at the Yourtown Blat who is constantly barking about the need for gun control does not know what the results of past gun laws was. Even though that is the very first step necessary to make an informed decision. The “researchers” George Soros has paid three million a year almost since time began know about as much about the results of gun control as a hospital nursery full of newborns. So instead of informed opinion from the Daily Blat, we get demands to repeat the gun control cantatrophes of 1905 and 1963:
Demands that have resulted in rises in the homicide rate, documented here by the red lines at the right side of the chart.
Bottom line? The Scientific Method systematically extracts causes and results from raw data, and lays both the data and the results out for inspection.
Any “study” that does not consider all the data, or that fails to fully reveal the data and its sources, is not scientific and should be treated like the scam in almost certainly is.