Introduction

Science should be about evidence and reason, not fear or belief. Too often, environmental claims rely on unproven predictions or spiritual ideas, ignoring the facts of nature’s cycles and resilience. I believe climate change is mostly a natural process, with human influence that isn’t always bad, and science must return to its roots—verifiable data, not emotion. This page defines what makes science empirical and rational, shows how climate patterns are often misunderstood, and calls for a focus on reason over fear.

Plato thinking.

What Is Empirical Science?

Empiricism means science is based on what we can see, measure, and test—not on opinions, feelings, or beliefs. It grew in the 17th and 18th centuries with thinkers like John Locke, who said knowledge comes from our senses, not guesses or authority. Rationalism builds on this, saying our actions and ideas should come from reason and evidence, not emotions or faith. The opposite, irrationalism, relies on intuition or belief, like thinking Nature is sacred or the world is ending without proof.

True science follows these principles. It doesn’t care about consensus or popularity—it needs hard data. For example, earth science, chemistry, and physics rely on measurements, like tracking temperature changes over centuries or testing how CO2 affects plants. When science strays from evidence, it stops being science and becomes something else, like a belief system.

Climate Science and Natural Patterns

Climate change is mostly a natural process, driven by cycles that have shaped Earth for millions of years. Around 1000 years ago, during the Medieval Warm Period, Greenland was warm enough for Viking settlers to grow crops and raise sheep. By the Little Ice Age, from 1300 to 1850, temperatures dropped, and Greenland became too cold for farming. Since 1850, the planet has warmed by about 1.2 degrees Celsius, or 0.006 degrees per year—a small change that aligns with natural recovery from that cold period. Nature has always changed like this, long before humans were around.

Some environmental claims ignore this history. For example, CO2 levels are often said to have been a steady 280 parts per million before 1800, but plant fossils show they varied between 260 and 340 ppm. CO2 is a tiny part of the air—about 0.04% today, with humans adding roughly a third of that since 1900. That small increase helps plants grow, leading to a 7% increase in leaf area since 2000, which boosts crop yields and supports nature’s resilience. Human influence isn’t always bad—it can bring benefits, and nature adapts to change.

Rejecting Irrational Fears

For decades, some have predicted environmental collapse, but the evidence tells a different story. In the 1970s, people said we’d run out of oil and metals by 1990—it didn’t happen. They predicted mass starvation by 2000, yet today we have record wheat and grain harvests. I can buy a 50-pound bag of chicken feed for $15, a 2-pound bag of carrots for $1, or 50 pounds of potatoes for $15. Gasoline costs about $3.50 a gallon, affordable for most. These facts show human progress, not collapse, thanks to science and reason.

Irrational fears often come from rejecting empirical science. Some environmentalists push spiritual ideas, like Nature being sacred, or rely on unproven predictions, like the Arctic melting completely by 2013—it didn’t. Glaciers in Greenland break off into icebergs naturally, due to snowfall and gravity, a process that’s been happening for centuries. Climate science should focus on data—like how much ice is in Antarctica, which holds 90% of the world’s ice—not on fear or belief. We need reason, not doomsday stories, to understand the world.

Conclusion

Science must be empirical and rational, grounded in evidence we can measure and test, not in fear or spiritual beliefs. Climate change is mostly a natural process, with cycles like the Little Ice Age and Medieval Warm Period showing how Earth has always changed. Human influence, like rising CO2, can even bring benefits, such as more plant growth, and nature is resilient enough to adapt. Instead of irrational fears about the end of the world, we should focus on facts: abundant food, affordable energy, and a planet that’s been through worse. Let’s return to science and reason, using data to guide us, not emotion.

Share This Article

Bristol Blog banner featuring social issues and education critiques by Lewis Loflin.