You Know What’s Lacking In The Scientific Method For Climate Science? “Human Engagement”

The Scientific Method is a process that was developed from a thousand years of scientific endeavors, about taking your feelings and personal opinions out and going with Facts, but, it’s rather inconvenient for a cult

Climate scientist pinpoints what exactly is lacking in the scientific method

Dr. Mika Tosca, 36, a climate scientist and assistant professor at the School Art Institute of Chicago, believes a certain step, if not process, is missing from the scientific method: a lack of human engagement. Of all subjects and their relation to science, art is what she accredits to allowing her to explore ways to better produce scientific knowledge.

“It’s [the scientific method] a lot of solo scientific work, whereas artists and designers start a lot of projects by talking to people,” Tosca told AccuWeather in an interview. Her theory is if scientists could adopt this process and think about the ways in which designers and artists create, perhaps scientists could find solutions to long-enduring questions.

For Tosca, one of those questions is how to address climate change.

The answer, she theorizes, may intersect with other movements for change.

“I think that if we are ever going to have a better world, for example, if we’re going to solve climate change, we can’t really do that on its own,” Tosca said. “It needs to be accompanied by, in my opinion, just sort of general liberation for queer people and for POC, and etc.”

Got that? Science needs to be all about feelings and social justice and stuff, hence, the Scientific Method, which is dispassionate and about facts needs to change (and because most climate cult research and hypotheses cannot stand up to the rigors of the SM)

Dr. Mika Tosca, a climate scientist and assistant professor at the School Art Institute of Chicago, tells AccuWeather how meteorology intersects with social movements.

As biases around marginalized groups persist across communities, factors from access to university-level education to not having representation or visibility in the field to a potential employer’s own biases all play a role in the diversity of the people coming to the table in the STEM field.

So, does this mean we have to force people of color, women, etc, into meteorology, climate science, STEM? And then teach them SJW stuff rather than science, of course.

“If I talk about being a trans[gender] scientist or, you know, someone talks about being a Black meteorologist or a woman, we’re often told you can leave your identity aside, but it’s not really true because the default identity for science has been white men.” (snip)

“Oftentimes, we think of science as being unbiased and objective and devoid of identity, but I’m here to talk about how that’s not really true and never has been true,” Tosca said. “I think we should bring our full selves to the job, even if it seems like two different things, like being trans and also studying the weather.”

This is a very long, crazy, wackadoodle piece, full of seriously cringe-worthy not-about-science stuff. Because it’s a cult. Not science. Hence the belief that the Scientific Method should be changed to accommodate them.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at 1800flowers.com. Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

10 Responses to “You Know What’s Lacking In The Scientific Method For Climate Science? “Human Engagement””

  1. Kye says:

    Everything the White man created that the left touches it destroys. Tosca’s a bit late for the burning science books though, the left has been doing that here since “Earth Day”. Here’s my evidence:

    https://a.disquscdn.com/get?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpreview.redd.it%2F3wo3amfhour51.jpg%3Fauto%3Dwebp%26s%3D3d92cb59134d83d374002f07f32f65b8747db371&key=qrPE73JR0ix_z6uv1p4qbQ&w=600&h

  2. Elwood P. Dowd says:

    Dr. Tosca is an asst prof, a “climate scientist”, at the Art Institute of Chicago?

    We all fully understand that the COD (Cult of Deniers) has lost all sense of reason when it comes to the science behind global warming. At first you denied that the Earth was even warming, then you denied that CO2 could be involved, now you recognize it’s warming and CO2 contributes but how much, you ask? But your descent is not stepwise, it’s a continuum on a sliding scale where the deniers move back and forth, picking misinformation to argue it’s always warming and cooling, that the current warming is miniscule and natural, that CO2 is heavier than N2 so settles low on the Earth, etc, etc, and so forth.

    The Earth is warming, to levels not seen in the Holocene. The current scientific theory is that CO2 emitted by human activities (primarily, burning fossil fuels). And importantly, there’s no reason to expect the warming to stop until atmospheric CO2 stabilizes and even starts to decrease.

    Good luck.

    • alanstorm says:

      We all fully understand that the COD (Cult of Deniers) has lost all sense of reason when it comes to the science behind global warming.

      Now, THAT’S funny, since the left has explicitly rejected rationality as “racist”, and has no idea how science works.

      At first you denied that the Earth was even warming, then you denied that CO2 could be involved, now you recognize it’s warming and CO2 contributes but how much, you ask?

      No, dear child, the problem is that idiot leftists (BIRM) went straight from “the earth is warming” to “OMG! We’re All Gonna DIE! if we don’t give government unlimited power!” In milliseconds. Virtually everyone recognizes that Earth is (slowly) getting warmer. The contribution of man-made CO2 is ONE issue. UNTIL you quantify humanity’s contribution, you have no rationale to act.

      Stop trying to talk about SCIENCE! when you know nothing about it.

    • Jl says:

      Of course there’s all kinds of papers showing earlier periods of the Holocene were warmer, if one knew how to look. But the bigger question, of course, is if it’s warmer now, so what? Typical alarmist response “it’s warmer!” , without any qualification.
      Has the human condition improved during this temp rise? Of course-life spans longer, poverty less, malnutrition and starving less, record crop yields, etc, That’s why they stop at “it hasn’t been this warm during the Holocene” (which of course it has) because that’s all they’ve got. https://notrickszone.com/2017/08/21/10000-to-5000-years-ago-global-sea-levels-were-3-meters-higher-temperatures-4-6-c-warmer/

      • Elwood P. Dowd says:

        So all good things that have happened the last century plus is due to what Teach calls miniscule warming? You’ve only acknowledged that it’s warming recently.

        It’s interesting that you believe temperature data from 1000 years ago but you believe/feel current temperature measurements are faked. LOL.

        And again you continue to cite a COD site instead of the original literature. We and others have demonstrated repeatedly that The Trickster misrepresents the papers he “reviews”.

  3. alanstorm says:

    “If I talk about being a trans[gender] scientist or, you know, someone talks about being a Black meteorologist or a woman, we’re often told you can leave your identity aside, but it’s not really true because the default identity for science has been white men.”

    Liberal Logic in all its glory.

  4. Kye says:

    We who demand actual science with regard to any scientific declarations not just climate and Wuhan Flu, had been first taught the earth was cooling or don’t you recall that The Elwood? So we were of course apprehensive since the same “experts” who declared an “ice age” was coming did a 180 and started crying about global warming. We think that if you didn’t find that disconcerting enough to doubt them then you’re an idiot.

    Then you morons began to declare “the science was settled” because there was a “consensus” of scientists (mostly non-climate) who drew straws and decided so no further inquisition or exploration was necessary. And in typical leftist/fascist style you tried to shut down any further discussion as “denial” which you are still doing. When you fascist can’t win an argument on it’s merit you always try to silence the opponent.

    You phony leftists always say you’re open minded and want other opinions then get all bent out of shape when you discover we actually have other opinions and try to gaslight them.

    Youi can put away your “what we deniers used to believe” because you were wrong about that and you can shitcan the idea that we are denying warming. We are not.

    We believe the earth naturally warms and cools for various reasons and since it’s been doing that forever man has little to do with it. Certainly man has not enough power to change nature to such a degree it would prove Life Ending. That’s because we believe that as things change so does man and we will not allow an extinction. But we will not accept that massive taxes, fascist laws, communist economy and the end of America will save mankind. Technology will. Man’s technology. If the government doesn’t collapse the economy with it’s crazy assed ideas and spending.

    Since neither the “experts” nor you know the exact reasons the earth warms or cools at different times there is no reason to expect the warming to stop or reverse because of a stabilization of CO2.

    I could revert to listing (once again) the thousands of times your “experts” who formed said “consensus” have been wrong just in the last 30-50 years but is that really necessary to do again? You know it and we know it. They have never made a correct predictions. Not One! If your mind wasn’t so closed you’d be calling them charlatans.

    • Elwood P. Dowd says:

      If The Kye would open his mind even a silly millimeter he would admit that the “global cooling scare” of the 70s was a a media creation not supported by a majority of climate scientists.

      The Kye further concluded that experts have never made a correct predictions (sic). Not One!, he shouts.

      They did accurately predict that as we dumped CO2 into the atmosphere that the Earth would warm. The Cult of Deniers (COD) have yet to offer a credible alternative hypothesis. Arctic sea ice, the Greenland ice sheet and parts of Antarctica are melting. The Arctic is warming faster than other areas as predicted. The stratosphere is cooling as predicted. It was predicted that CO2 what reduce ocean pH.

      COD expert Pat Michaels famously stated in the WSJ that it hadn’t warmed since 2000 (if you discounted the peaks of warming)! Sure, leave out the hot years and it’s still cool!

      The Kye’s belief/feeling that climate scientists consider the “science settled” is plain silly. Scientists never believe science is settled. Any theory, even one supported by as much evidence as the CO2 theory of global warming, can be falsified with evidence. Even when scientists reach a scientific consensus on a theory, it doesn’t mean the theory is proven. In fact, scientific theories are rarely (if ever) proven. The Kye follows Teach’s teaching that consensus has “no place” in science. That is also just plain silly. There exist scientists trying to undo the consensus on evolution by offering creation by a supernatural being as an alternative “theory”. No doubt millions believe that a supernatural force created life of Earth but that is not a scientific theory.

      The Kye then denies science, finally admitting his opposition to climate science: “… we will not accept that massive taxes, fascist laws, communist economy and the end of America will save mankind. Technology will. Man’s technology. If the government doesn’t collapse the economy with it’s crazy assed ideas and spending.”

      The Kye mimicks The Teach, mocking science and questioning the motives of scientists, in order to promote their own political positions. Massive taxes, fascist laws, communist economy and the end of America??? Paranoid much? Anything to back up your fears?

  5. Sabre22 says:

    There is no Scientific method in Global Bullshit warming anyway. Over 500 papers published in 2019b disputing it and the only thing you hear is crickets chirping. Little miss Traumatized Greta is a stooge. Look at the FACTS. If CO2 was the problem How come animals evolved to expel CO2 when breathing out and Plants evolved to take in CO2 strip off the Carbon atom for growing itself and expel the oxygen atoms? If CO2 was harmful this would not exist.

    • Elwood P. Dowd says:

      Commenter: If CO2 was the problem How come animals evolved to expel CO2 when breathing out and Plants evolved to take in CO2 strip off the Carbon atom for growing itself and expel the oxygen atoms? If CO2 was harmful this would not exist.

      It’s funny how plants and animals co-evolved, isn’t it? Did you also know that too much O2 would be hazardous? If oxygen was harmful it would not exist, right? We can all agree that too much water can be harmful, right? Too much all-natural, and necessary-for-life minerals such as calcium, potassium, sodium, chloride, sulfur, cobalt, phosphorus etc can all be harmful. CO2 is not a problem in itself, but it does trap infrared radiation causing Earth’s surface to warm. That’s why the Earth is not ice covered!! That’s good, right? But too much…

Bad Behavior has blocked 8761 access attempts in the last 7 days.