Paradigm 1: We now know nearly everything. Anything we don’t yet know we can work out from theory. A single observation is sufficient to validate a theory. Validated theories should not be questioned. Theories are respected in proportion to their complexity.
Paradigm 2: We don’t know how much we don’t know. New insights are only gained by careful observation. Theories are a guide to further observation. A theory cannot be validated but a single counter-example is sufficient to invalidate a theory. The simplest theory that explains the observations is the best one to use.
Paradigm 1 is called The Science by journalists and administrators.
Paradigm 2 is called the scientific method.
To date, climate “science” has depended heavily on the first paradigm due to the predominance of numerical modelling. We use the second approach by developing statistical methods to estimate relationships between environmental observations (i.e. between temperature data, concentration data, emissions data etc.)