the gold standard for substantiating the water vapor feedback hypothesis would be if the proponents of that hypothesis made specific interesting and accurate predictions about future events.
No, that is evidence of authority. The gold standard would be if the assumptions that led to the hypothesis also led to specific interesting and accurate predictions about future events (and don’t lead to inaccurate predictions).
No, that is evidence of authority. The gold standard would be if the assumptions that led to the hypothesis also led to specific interesting and accurate predictions about future events (and don’t lead to inaccurate predictions).
I agree . . . as a practical matter there might not be much difference, but I agree.