&gt; You know what makes modern physics true? Falsifiability and verifiability. You build a theory, make predictions, develop an experiment, and then conduct the experiment, multiple times. Climatology stops after the first two.<p>This is, obviously and demonstrably, wrong. The data is out there, the methodologies are out there, and there is tons of related open-source software. You can conduct your own experiments and come to your own conclusions.<p>This guy [1][2], for example, did, and imagine what: he independently verified what 99% of climate scientists have been saying.<p>Why don&#x27;t you give it a go? Put your money where your mouth is and see for yourself what is true and what isn&#x27;t.<p>Edit: to the poster below, the data is public, just a quick google search away. For example [3].<p>[1] <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;forums.sandiegouniontribune.com&#x2F;showpost.php?p=5337377&amp;postcount=222" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;forums.sandiegouniontribune.com&#x2F;showpost.php?p=533737...</a><p>[2] <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;arstechnica.com&#x2F;science&#x2F;2016&#x2F;01&#x2F;thorough-not-thoroughly-fabricated-the-truth-about-global-temperature-data&#x2F;?comments=1&amp;post=30509481#" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;arstechnica.com&#x2F;science&#x2F;2016&#x2F;01&#x2F;thorough-not-thorough...</a><p>[3] ftp:&#x2F;&#x2F;ftp.ncdc.noaa.gov&#x2F;pub&#x2F;data&#x2F;ghcn&#x2F;v3&#x2F;