I would like to ask everyone who believes the term “global warming” is a “politically correct obfuscatory term of the week that’s being fraudulently perpetrated by the government” to please do some additional fact-finding on the subject.
Focus on the facts and the data. I suggest you start by going to the journal “Science” at www.sciencemag.org and searching the term “global warming.” Read some of the articles you find there. You will find that most of the debate is about what is causing the climate to change, not whether it is changing or not.
If the evidence you find doesn’t convince you, then write to The Daily Times and try to convince us to believe your “government conspiracy” theory. Explain to us how you reconcile the facts and data you found with your theory. That would be very educational for all of us.
Give us your facts and let’s compare. I believe if you can prove global warming is not happening, you will be the most celebrated person alive and a hero.
E. Eugene Williams
Salisbury
Williams is an associate professor of biological sciences at Salisbury University. — Editor
http://www.delmarvanow.com/article/20110121/OPINION01/101210340
The null hypothesis is a hypothesis which the researcher tries to disprove, reject or nullify.
But using ambiguous wording for a hypothesis (Open to more than one interpretation; having a double meaning.) i.e. “climate change”, “global warming, “climate disruption” these terms are very unspecific terms that cover a wide range of areas in science and usually covers the lack of evidence for an event such as the recent “warm/cold” and “drought/Floods”.
The first step to disproving a hypothesis is to have specific and clear evidence of a hypothesis of which to disprove, Where as if you use unspecific terms that cover certain areas of a political belief then the lack of evidence is self-explanatory as political rhetoric.
It is important to carefully select the wording of the null, and ensure that it is as SPECIFIC as possible.
Not much of a biologist if he does not understand the most basic principal of science. No one has to disprove anything.