T8 wrote:
On Dec 24, 8:09 pm, Tom Gardner wrote:
On Dec 24, 11:38 pm, T8 wrote:

No, I want the opportunity for people to test, and disprove your
theory.
Is there any possibility that it might "prove" the theory?
Or is that out of the question?

Sounds like you mind is (almost completely?) decided!

The way I look at it, the burden of proof is on the researcher to
prove the theory which upsets the status quo, in this case AGW.
However, I believe that burden also includes providing every
opportunity for his skeptics to prove him wrong by checking his
assumptions, raw data, reasoning, models, results and conclusions.
These responsibilities are amplified by the rush to public policy and
the extreme costs of such policy. In my view this is absolutely
required. My impression, exemplified by JohnC's response, is that the
AGW community is not interested in being found in error, even if such
errors are factual and provable.


Just curious -- what is your position on the theory of evolution? Have
the scientists carried their burden of proof there despite a lot of
opposition?