In British thought there has been a strong empiricist tradition, going back to Bacon, Hume, and Mill, which has emphasized
the observational side of science.
Anybody with an education in the
sciences can tell when a credentialed charlatan is violating scientific method, «cherry - picking» data, manipulating computer simulations (climate models) to «draw the curve, then plot the points,» concealing his raw
observational data sets from properly skeptical examiners, corrupting academic peer review (both to suppress the publication
of colleagues» studies casting doubt upon the reviewing officers» pet hypotheses and to ensure that the submissions
of «The Team» do not suffer impediments to publication), and concerting all these violations
of professional ethical standards by way
of back - room confabs and some
of the most incredibly stupid e-mails this
side of Enron's «Smartest Guys in the Room.»