Cherry-picking vs. the Scientific Method

Good science is about asking questions, and then gathering and analyzing information in order to find the most plausible answers to those questions.

And then doing it all over again in as many different ways as possible.

Here's what's involved in this process, termed the scientific method:

1. Ask a question based on observed phenomena.
   In climate research, the questions initially were variations on, "Why is the Earth's surface temperature increasing at an unusual rate relative to time? What is causing the accelerated rate of change?" Lately they've included more focused inquiries as well, such as "Why is the pH level of the ocean becoming more acidic? How is this affecting ocean life?" or "What impacts do warmer ocean temperatures have on the severity of hurricanes and typhoons?"
2. Do background research. This includes knowing how to build on the past work of others, and avoid repeating their mistakes
3. Construct a hypothesis, in a way that you can measure the results, and answer your question.
4. Test your hypothesis, by doing an experiment to gather data. Do the experiment more than once, and do it fairly (which means, change only one factor at a time and keep the rest constant).
5. Analyze the data.
6. Draw a conclusion.
   You may find that your hypothesis was false. If so, construct a new hypothesis and start to examine it anew using the scientific method.
   If you determine that your hypothesis is true, you may well want to test it again in a wholly different way, as well as compare it to the work of other researchers who have used other methods to test the same or similar hypotheses.
7. Communicate your results to other scientists.
   Researchers present their results at professional conferences, and they submit their research to scientific journals to be published, often after a review by their scientific peers.

"Cherry-picking" means picking out the best, juciest, ripest facts to support a predetermined conclusion, from a whole bin of equally sweet, high-quality facts.

There's no test, no trial by peer review, and very seldom any admission that the hypothesis was false.

The cherry-picking phenomenon arises often in the realm of global warming skepticism. By and large -- as evidenced by the converations that take place on this blog -- skepticism involves accepting the data that support a pre-determined belief.

Usually that belief is that the earth's surface temperature is not increasing.  A variant thread of belief is that global warming is happening, but isn't caused by human-propelled increases of carbon dioxide concentrations in the atmosphere.

To support the belief, deniers throw out the data that undercut these answers.

Throwing out good data because they contradict something one dearly wants to be true, regardless of whether it is or is not true, is cherry-picking.

Scientific facts are not about belief.  They're our best, most informed, most tested explanations of what's actually happening to us, and around us.

-----

Image: Chart of the scientific method, via Science Buddies