Have you ever read the work by Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and felt disturbed by terms like “Medium agreement” or “Robust evidence”? Such terms origin in a document called: Guidance Note for Lead Authors of the IPCC Fifth Assessment Report on Consistent Treatment of Uncertainties “These guidance notes are intended to assist Lead Authors of the Fifth Assessment Report (AR5) in the consistent treatment of uncertainties across all three Working Groups.” In short it describes: “The following summary terms are used to describe the available evidence: limited, medium, or robust; and for the degree of agreement: low, medium, or high. ”
Please have a look at the Guidance Note linked above. It is well worth a read.
And if you get a feeling that the Guidance Note is not at all very scientific, you will probably find the following quotes by Karl Popper to be of interest:
Karl Popper; The logic of scientific discovery;
8 SCIENTIFIC OBJECTIVITY AND SUBJECTIVE CONVICTION
(Karl Popper was the master mind behind critical rationalism)
“from the epistemological point of view, it is quite irrelevant whether my feeling of conviction was strong or weak; whether it came from a strong or even irresistible impression of indubitable certainty (or ‘self- evidence’), or merely from a doubtful surmise. None of this has any bearing on the question of how scientific statements can be justified. Considerations like these do not of course provide an answer to the problem of the empirical basis. But at least they help us to see its main difficulty. In demanding objectivity for basic statements as well as for other scientific statements, we deprive ourselves of any logical means by which we might have hoped to reduce the truth of scientific statements to our experiences. Moreover we debar ourselves from granting any favoured status to statements which describe experiences, such as those statements which describe our perceptions (and which are sometimes called ‘protocol sentences’).
The intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change regard itself as a scientific body. About IPCC.
However – in summary:
Judging by the works of Karl Popper:
The “Guidance Note on Consistent Treatment of Uncertainties by IPCC” is largely incompatible with the idea of scientific objectivity.
2015-11-22 Format changes + links + sentence on critical rationalism