Can We Really Call Climate Science A Science?

Blog, Environment, Les Routledge

There is an interesting post at Watts up With That discussing a recent Forbes article on climate science.

In the broader debate, I wish we could drop labels like “Warmists” or “Deniers.”  Those characterizations are far too simplistic, particularly as it applies to the discussions in the science field.

I agree with several points in this post, namely:

  1. Climate Science is an immature field that will evolve over time as out understanding of the field improves
  2. Respect and civil discussions are necessary to advance scientific understanding
  3. The claim that there is a “consensus” in science ignores who science works


For my own part, I am willing to concede that human actions can affect weather and to an extent local climate.  Urban heat islands are just one example of that effect in action.  However, I still believe that the evidence is lacking that those local to regional effects apply to the world as a whole.  Maybe they do or maybe they don’t.  Today, I personally do not believe we know enough about how climate works to categorically conclude one way or another.

Perhaps I am still locked in the 1980’s mindset, but I still like the idea of act local as a means to improving environmental stewardship.