The “masters of the language” have accused me of insulting you - I did no such thing.
I criticized your question as being “inane”, or “empty”.
As a scientist, I would NEVER attempt to prove an hypothesis “true”. I would attempt to prove the hypothesis “false”. That’s part of the scientific method.
After many attempts to “falsify” my hypothesis without success, I will use the statistics appropriate to my experimental design to assign a tentative probability that were the same experiment conducted 100 times, by myself and others, 95-99% of those experiments would yield the same results.
It is NOT my obligation to repeatedly bang into people’s heads the accepted nature of the scientific method. It is a means to a reasonable end: assigning a tentative probability to the validity of an hypothesis.
So-called consensus “scientists” signing on to an asinine statement that “anthropogenic global warming” is ESTABLISHED FACT, are not my kind of “scientists”.
Merely “true believers” who disdain the scientific method in favor of prognostication based on a very small evidentiary base: IOW, delusional thinking.
And these pseudo-scientists can publish all sorts of observations, with accompanying polls of their “peers”, till doomsday. I won’t be coerced to accept hogwash!!
Now, I posit a challenge: cite just ONE publication in a reputable scientific journal, in which the authors conclude that their observations have been challenged and tentatively proven to be correct by OTHER scientists in the same field of scientific inquiry.