To consider the hypothesis we really need to view the big picture, and
make some robust predictions which are capable of being disproved.
Not exact matches
They would need some
robust prediction for an experiment or a possible observation that could be carried out which would confirm some
prediction made by religion that can not be
made in lieu of it.
This
makes the conclusions and
predictions more
robust,» Frey said.
«As a process committed to acceptance of deep uncertainties,» they say, «CIDA does not attempt to reduce uncertainties or
make predictions, but rather determine which decision options are
robust to a variety of plausible futures.»
They admit that we had virtually no ocean data that has 1000 times the heat capacity of the atmosphere and is in direct contact with the atmosphere yet they are willing to
make predictions without really any
robust data from that variable data at all (pre-2000) and they admitted they didn't understand clouds yet that variable could easily swamp all other effects yet they said with 95 % surety the heating from 1975 - 1998 was caused by CO2 (110 % according to Gavin).