Further perspective from Karl R. Popper

In his book The Logic of Scientific Discovery, Popper examines the faulty, unscientific logic of negative assertions that cannot be examined by use of rational methods. Popper used the example of black swans: A valid scientific statement about black swans would be:“ I saw a black swan in a rice field south of Beaumont last Friday.”The reason such a statement is valid, is that it can be challenged. Furthermore the maker of such a statement can acquire proof to back up his assertion, a time-stamp camera with a telephoto lens, for example. A non scientific statement concerning black swans would be: “ There are no black swans anywhere, any time.” It is non scientific, because there is no practical way of proving it is wrong. The old saying is: “You can’t prove a negative.”

The following statement is non scientific, because it makes an assertion that cannot be proven false:

“We are entering a catastrophic period for the entire world; the earth will be devastated by man-made global warming.”

Environmentalists have succeeded in bamboozling all inhabitants of this planet with such faulty logic, furthermore, the false “science” is so obviously bad, it leads one to conclude, sadly: most scientists do not know what constitutes a valid scientific statement. They need to spend some time reading Popper’s The Logic of Scientific Discovery.

Repeating the point made earlier: We should not be so presumptuous about nature. In a match between nature and ourselves we will usually be bested by nature. The so called environmentalists think that they have a special pipeline for communicating with nature to find out her needs. They missed by a mile in Yosemite. All that money spent building wooden walkways in Yosemite would have been better spent upgrading freeways in Oakland.