The measurement that shows the sea level is rising was taken from Hong Kong, which is slowly sinking. Had it been taken from Bergen it would have shown that the sea level is falling, because Scandinavia is still rising after being squashed in the ice age. Anyway, it has become ever colder since 1998, so what is everybody going on about?

I recall attending the British Association for the Advancement of Science meeting in Cambridge in the early 60s. There were two outstanding presentations.

The first demonstrated mathematically and aeronautically that man-powered flight was now and ever impossible, and the person who had offered a prize to the first man-powered flight over the English Channel’s money was safe. Soon afterwards a man pedalled his aircraft across the Channel.

The second explained graphically that pharmaceuticals were the answer to all medical questions, and that schizophrenia, for example, would be cured shortly and for ever by a short course of pills from the chemists. As it is, Pharmacueticals are the biggest killer in the world today, Check it out.

Moreover, the idea that science can also predict the likely outcomes from previously established first principles is so often forgotten by the ‘ordinary man’ because so few people are taught the principles (basic chemistry and physics) or how to apply them. Furthermore, journalists (many of whom are scientifically illiterate) are often guilty of describing climate science as ‘new’ or ‘revolutionary’ or ‘untested’ (based on the fact that it is only recently that sufficiently powerful computers have been available to crunch the numbers) whereas the physics and chemistry have been understood for a very long time. Results of initial ‘back of an envelope’ predictions for many modern issues such as peak oil and climate change, using first principles, in the 1970s and 80s, have not proved to be far away from modern sophisticated models and, because our single sample (the earth) is subject to time and exponential economic growth, the sense of urgency coming from environmental scientists was treated as panic by the media – partly because the back of the envelope predictions were so dire and partly because the panic was real.

The tragedy is that the major industrialised countries could have acted on climate change 30 years earlier if our ‘ordinary men’ running governments had the ability to sit for a few weeks with a calculator, a science data book and a sharp pencil.

Nick

Ben’s question was not about theories / hypotheses that were long held although wrong, but such that were held *inspite* of contradicting evidence.

Your list contains, as far as I can tell, only hypotheses that simply couldn’t be put to the test until later times – and when they were finally tested, they were scrapped. Good scientific practice.

Or am I seriously mistaken here?
Daniel

PS: Wave/particle theory of light, though… for many practical applications those are still alive and kicking. Maybe as disciplines of quantum mechanics, but displaying both the qualities of wave and particle.

If he had said something like: "Based on my limited understanding of the subject, it seems like the scientific consensus on AGW is not properly robust. Therefore I deem it more responsible to focus our political debate around other areas of environmental protection until better research is done." …I don't think as many people would have gotten their knickers in a twist. The first blogpost was not up to the standards we have come to expect from Randi.

I fear the unquestioning stance brings in question your skeptical credentials.

in the rush to jump onto a populist bandwagon you have forgotten to listen and rationally evaluate the claims.

NO other area of science makes absolute decorations of TRUTH, just the people who watch the weather ????

Be afraid be very afraid …….

Not even gravity is spoken of in terms of absolute fact, the questioning and testing is continuing, but not so with the weather, this is now uncontested absolute final fact…. the inner scientist in all of you should be disgusted with this consensus.

And you lot pock fun at the blind faith of the snake oil salesman… shame on you shame!!!!

"I am so skeptical, I even suspect the sincerity of sceptics"

The flat earth consensus was very wide spread among the main stream it was the minority sceptics that were proven right..

Maybe for the first time in recorded history, that the mainstream authoritarian consensus will be correct,

Strangely they have put their reputation on the line over the weather !!!!

Maybe persecuting all dissent or question this time will prove to be the best course of action.

If nothing happens and the temperate just rises like it has since the last Ice age, no more or maybe less will the experts humbly apologies and return the billions

the net decade will possibly destroy the peoples respect for science and its methods, banning all dissent or questioning has a very high price to pay if you are wrong.

Maybe the weather is not something we should be certain about…. we should leave the door open for an embarrassed "Ooop well I thought I was right" We should make room for Randi and his kind, they may just be the only ones left with any creadability left when this panic all die down in ten years or so !!

Please take note of the claims.. every thing seem to be caused by global warming now days – "compensate us NOW"

The cave men were right during the Ice Age, the planet did warm up and it was caused by men…. the women are innocent