,
9 tweets,
3 min read
Read on Twitter
To the whack jobs out there who think they have a better theory of climate, here's what you have to do to convince scientists: 1/
step 1: you have to show the governing equations; i.e., temperature as a function of the key variables; T = XXX or dT/dt = XXX 2/
step 2: then you must show this reproduces key observations. Mainstream theory explains just about everything, so ur theory should too 3/
step 3: if you want to superced mainstream climate theory, you must show your theory explains something that mainstream theory doesn't 4/
one of the reasons people believed general relativity was that it explained the orbit of Mercury, which Newtonian mechanics doesn't 5/5
One more, h/t @JohnMashey: given evidence that CO2 traps energy, you also have to explain why that's NOT causing climate to shift 6/6
@JohnMashey Yet one more h/t @ericsteig: if your theory makes a non-obvious prediction, that will be very convincing. 7/
@JohnMashey @ericsteig e.g., general relativity makes prediction that position of stars is different during eclipse. That was confirmed, convincing scientists 8/
@JohnMashey @ericsteig Mainstream climate science has made many successful predictions; Pierrehumbert's AGU Tyndall lecture explains: 9/9
