We consider the charge that climate science is not really science since it does not meet the criteria of falsifiability set out by Karl Popper. Popper’s views have been extremely influential but we argue that Popper’s criteria fail to take account of the complexity of modern science, and climate science is a perfect example of this failure. the mismatch between Popper’s criteria and climate science is a reason for doubting Popper’s criteria, not for doubting the legitimacy of climate science.
- Ocean Temperature
- Climate Science
- Anthropogenic Climate Change
- Ocean Process
- Orthodox View
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use onlyLearn about institutional subscriptions
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
© 2013 David Coady and Richard Corry
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Coady, D., Corry, R. (2013). Is Climate Science Really Science?. In: The Climate Change Debate: An Epistemic and Ethical Enquiry. Palgrave Pivot, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137326287_5
Publisher Name: Palgrave Pivot, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-45969-8
Online ISBN: 978-1-137-32628-7