Climate Science History - - Working Paper
Much of what follows comes from the work David Appell, david.appell@gmail.com (Please send additions, corrections etc.). I have added narration and give credit to "DA" with links. Ed Evans, webmaster, KillerOceans.com and ClimateDeception.net.
Outliers
Outliers and xyz
Antoine Lavoisier
- Suggestive of Fourier's glass greenhouse experiment.
Pioneer of stoichiometry
1778 he coined the name oxygen for this constituent of the air, from the Greek words meaning "acid former," established water as a compound of oxygen and hydrogen
Lavoisier's researches included some of the first truly quantitative chemical experiments. He carefully weighed the reactants and products of a chemical reaction in a sealed glass vessel so that no gases could escape, which was a crucial step in the advancement of chemistry.[37] In 1774, he showed that, although matter can change its state in a chemical reaction, the total mass of matter is the same at the end as at the beginning of every chemical change. Thus, for instance, if a piece of wood is burned to ashes, the total mass remains unchanged if gaseous reactants and products are included. Lavoisier's experiments supported the law of conservation of mass. In France it is taught as Lavoisier's Law and is paraphrased from a statement in his Traité Élémentaire de Chimie: "Nothing is lost, nothing is created, everything is transformed." Mikhail Lomonosov (1711–1765) had previously expressed similar ideas in 1748 and proved them in experiments; others whose ideas pre-date the work of Lavoisier include Jean Rey (1583–1645), Joseph Black (1728–1799), and Henry Cavendish (1731–1810).[38]
You can read about the logic of science below or go directly to What They Did.
Inductive and Deductive Logic, or Sir rancis Bacon vs. Aristotle
Inductive or bottom-up (evidence to conclusion) approach and the deductive or top-down (idea testing with supporting argument).
Climate scientists rely on inductive logic (reason- Sir Francis Bacon) to learn and make predictions about nature. They also rely on deductive logic (reason – Aristotle) to explain their "theories." Sotimes climate scientists use math, especially statistics (probability) helps to deliver their findings.
Climate scientists may measure their confidence in their predictions with terms like these (IPCC):
low confidence
medium confidece
most confidence
We see a big difference between Bacon's inductive reasoning as used in science, bottom up, and Aristotle's deductive reasoning, top down. Here's a short example.
Deductive logic gives us a consistent way to think: syllogisms, propositions.
Syllogism:
All men are mortal.
Socrates is a man
Therefore: Socrates is mortal.
Propositions become positive or negative:
Some men enjoy the beach.
Some men do not enjoy the beach.
Now, notice the difference with inductive reasoning. It tells about causation but not a certainty. In inductive logic, reason gives us possibilities but never certainties. Nothing in science becomes 100 percent certain. If it did become "certain," it would not be science.
So we use terms like these for our inductive reasoning in science:
The outcome becomes less likely, likely, more likely, highly likely.
As a result, inductive logic gives us outcomes like these examples:
1. A cobra bite may cause death about 80 times out of 100.
2, A 420 parts per million atmospheric carbon dioxide density may cause melting of the Arctic Ocean ice.
Facts in science must have "reproducibility." This means that others may follow the same experiments or observations and come up with the same or similar predictions, outcomes. "Stuff happens." We find that climate science history shows us a common thread for reproducible, experimental outcomes.
For example, Joseph Fourier's gas research in1827 produces the same reproducible outcomes for greenhouse gases today. Many chemistry students around the world reproduce Fourier's gas experiments.
.So genuine science must produce predictible outcomes, or it fails as a "science." It becomes something else like alchemy, astrology, or something less than sciennce.
While learning about climate science history, it helps to remember that science uses inductive logic and inductive reasoning. We give credit for scientific reason to Sir Francis Bacon, an English philosopher. He pointed out the importance of inductive logic.
Keep this tip-bid of information handy. It becomes useful when someone may confuse inductive reasoning with deductive reasoning. We give credit for deductive logic to Aristotle, a Greek Philosopher. Knowing the difference becomes significant.
Commentery: Francis Bacon's legacy, inductive logic for science.
Climate science shares a common denominator with other sciences. It relies on inductive logic, not the more commonly used deductive logic that so many of us use routinely. Sir Francis Bacon pointed to the power of inductive logic for scientific methods. Aristotle gave us deductive logic.
Climate science has roots in both chemistry and physics as found in Joseph Fourier's research into gasses and lifght interactions. 01'
1801 DALTON, John
Probably about 1801; there's no known birthdate since his Quacker parents did not believe in using a birthdate.
"He was the first to show the rise of temperature when it [gas] was compressed and to show that the amount of water vapor the air could hold rose with temperature.
He's showing us a picture of hurricanes and rainfall increase; rising surface temperatures and humidity follow, as today.
The foundations of our understanding of global warming began almost two centuries ago. Fourier postulated a greenhouse effect in 1827. He showed us that earth's climate sensitivity ("forcing") changes in atmospheric CO2 density.
The rise in atmospheric CO2 concentration was discovered half a century ago by Keeling while using his equipment on Mount Mona Loa, Hawhii. We know that the fundamentals of climate science underlying predictions for human-induced climate change were in the last few decades.
1960
"The Concentration and Isotopic Abundances of Carbon Dioxide in the Atmosphere," C. D. Keeling, Tellus 12 (1960) pp 200-203.
