Global Warming Hysteria Is Destroying The Credibility Of Science

• February 6, 2009

The biggest fraud ever perpetrated this side of socialist political theory.
Though I guess some would argue that global warming hysteria is the wolf of socialism dressed up as a meteorological threat. And they’re probably right.

Like famished swine shoving each other aside to get to the trough, self-proclaimed scientists and real politicians are again launching headline upon headline to claim yet another disaster in the name of utterly unproven global warming. Did you know that the flock of geese that flew into US Airways jet engines this month in New York City were put there by global warming? And that London fogs, or rather their absence, are making global warming worse?
Yep. It’s right there in the paper, Maud.
As scientific skeptics are finally discovering the courage to speak out, the hype machine is faltering just a little.
But President Obama just appointed a True Believer to be science czar in the White House. So we can expect the politicians to keep hammering on this little piggy bank until the last golden coin drops out. You’ll be paying for the biggest false alarm in history for years to come.
But what worries me most is that the credibility of science may never recover — and perhaps it shouldn’t. Credibility has to be earned, and once it’s squandered may never be recovered. By now far too many scientists have knowingly colluded in an historic fraud, one that would put Bernie Madoff to shame. We are seeing political larceny here on a truly planetary scale.
Why should scientists who’ve gambled their own reputations on this fakery ever be trusted again? They shouldn’t. Would you entrust your life savings to Bernie Madoff? Right.

Scientists who are also global warming alarmists are going to lose their credibility the same way scientists who wouldn’t contradict the dogma of the Catholic Church in a different age lost their credibility.

Tags: Domestic Issues, Politics

http://Array carrick

Houston, I take no offense. The point I am making is realclimate.org is not a science site, but an advocacy one. It’s harmful to science that they conflate their scientific careers with their personal advocacy.

I completely disagree with DocDave on evolution. I’ve seen the process in which scientists get on these kinds of irrational jihads in the past, and in this case it’s one part political (they are democrats, the republicans are generally anti AGW so they take the opposite position), one part glory hound (your name gets in the press a lot) and one part funding whore (lots of $$$ if you jump on the bandwagon.)
carrick

It gets worse.

Read this about Gavin Schmidt (one of the “team”) stealing Steve McIntyre’s work then attempting to bully Roger Pielke Jr for posting what amounts to be an accurate portrayal of events.
carrick

DocDave, it is not a knee-jerk reaction, though it probably makes you feel better to think that.

Evolution does not account for the origin of species or anything that originate from none already living organisms.

Briefly evolutionary attempts to explain biodiversity not biogenesis. That’s not a flaw, it’s inherent in the linguistic interpretation of the word “evolutionary”.

The originals had to come from somewhere and that is the basis of ID which evolution (nor you) can refute.

For a to be a scientific theory, it must be falsifiable, which this is not. That takes it outside of the demesne of science.

Empirical science by its nature cannot address ontological questions such as what came before the universe, whether there is a God etc.

So this thing didn’t “start with the theory of evolution”. You misinterpret people and the shallowness of their motives here. Evolution could never have appeared as a theory, and you would still have glory hounds like Hansen, funding whores like many of the people in the AGW group, and non-climatologists who adopt it as a platform position either because they see it as a way of opposing the Republicans or as a mechanism for effecting “social justice” (and so forth).

In the end, what has given AGW traction has nothing to do with evolutionary theory or fact at all. And that’s the reason I completely disagree with you on this one.
deadrody

Unfortunately, Dave, Intelligent Design isn’t actually, you know, “science”, so your point is moot. I would hope “scientists” would ignore it.
carrick

Suite:

“Scientists” have been feeding at the federal teat so long the entire scientific world in America is now starting to settle down to following whatever the common political wisdom is to get the bucks.

I have to disagree with you on this. We scientists go where we think the science should be leading us. Sometimes this means giving up federal dollars if we don’t think their program directives are in the best interest of the science.

People like Michael Mann and Gavin Schmidt aren’t behaving as scientists but policy activists. Certainly part of what is driving that is $$$ and public recognition.

The same sort of thing that drove the IT professionals to hype Y2K.
dawneyr

The global warming hysteria is another stillborn brain child of the UN and its little Grimm Reaper high priests. The crap that authentic, honest scientists are enduring is the similar to that which is being hurled at Ben Stein for daring to question the Establishment.

The proposed UN treaty on the “rights of a child” flies in the face of God and God-given parental authority. Such a proposal is more than suspicious coming from an entity that has knowingly issued sterilization drugs under the guise of healthcare vaccinations. An entity whose Secretary General called for criminalizing dissident to the extremely controversial and polarizing global warming alarmism. Examples could go on and on.

Several years ago, made by changes in circumstance, my children had to stop attending a private school and change to a public school. It has been a nightmare. I adore the school children and admire many of the teachers and even some retired administrators, but I loathe the system that is evermore controlling, parent ostracizing, and full of teaching untruths as higher-knowledge fact. I’ve had to fight them at every stop to protect my children from anti-Biblical and destructive education. The only thing that has kept them from becoming fully indoctrinated is the grace of God and my demand after demand to opt them out. I’ve been told excuse and after excuse and then I heard, “This goes over my head.” Indeed, it does go over the heads of the public school administration. The rancid drip flows right from the top down through the media and schools.

Children would become wards of an anti-Biblical Christianity type state should this UN treaty pass. This isn’t just a matter of different opinions of left and right. It is a matter of removing the God-given parental authority, and placing it in the hands of the government to gain the minds, bodies and behavior of the future generations. I believe that Obama’s puppy-faced expansion of children’s insurance is just the rolling up of the sleeves for this devastating UN treaty. That’s why the UN enlists gullible Christ-professing people like Rick Warren to publicly kiss Obama’s butt, so their devious measures will raise fewer eyebrows and red flags. They have so little factually and ethically to stand on that they have to induct pouty-lipped actresses and big cuddly polar bears and baby seals to pull of their fraud campaign. It is a concerted effort.

About six months before Al Gore and his trusty side kick Leonardo DiCaprio went public with the plight of the polar bear, I received numerous requests, borderline pleas, on my clipart and color pages web site asking me to draw and post polar bear cartoons. Months later the media was crawling with poor little polar bear photos and video clips.

Parents, we have a God-given duty to reject this treaty and protect our children.

Proverbs 22:6 Train up a child in the way he should go, And when he is old he will not depart from it.

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=87929
docdave

I completely disagree with DocDave on evolution

carrick, I knew you would say that but that too is a kneejerk reaction that does not suit one of your intellect. I am not saying that evolution (I prefer to call it adaptability) doesn’t exist in some form but it is far from the scientific fact that is presented by the scientific community at large and is indoctrinated into students by schools. Evolution does not account for the origin of species or anything that originate from none already living organisms. The originals had to come from somewhere and that is the basis of ID which evolution (nor you) can refute.

Anyway if natural selection really work, the world would be void of liberals since they are unable to compete with others being too dependant on nanny government and other welfare institutions. /heh
bill-tb

Yep that’s how I see it. You wonder why real scientists will go along? Oh yeah, forgot, grant money.

Pretty much the same as Obama is doing for the credibility of the Federal Government.
Neiman

Unfortunately, Dave, Intelligent Design isn’t actually, you know, “science”, so your point is moot. I would hope “scientists” would ignore it

.

Deadrody: You are absolutely, incredibly wrong: Intelligent Design, Divine Creation and Evolution are all science based, the same exact scientific data is involved in each case, only the interpretation of the data is different, but still that too is scientific in nature. The real difference is the underlying assumption or life model used. You are free to be a disciple of the secular humanist religion of evolution, but you not free to lie and claim ID or Divine Creation are not science based!
docdave

Actually this started with the promotion of evolution theory as scientific fact, a proposition swallowed by most of the scientific community. Blind faith in evolution also resulted in radical opposition against creativists (intelligent design) and consequently has further resulted in a scientific community that is not open to any and all theories.
http://www.sayanythingblog.com/ electnixon

excellent image on the front page
http://tatertotsforthemasses.blogspot.com/ Houston

Carrick,

I’ll apologize for all of us for making a generalization. Obviously not all scientists are corrupt and it is a shame to have the entire community bashed because of the actions of some.
http://sayanythingblog.com robport

I have to disagree with you on this. We scientists go where we think the science should be leading us. Sometimes this means giving up federal dollars if we don’t think their program directives are in the best interest of the science.

I don’t doubt that most scientists are like this. But not everyone has the same level of principle as you do, Carrick.
http://suitepotato.blogspot.com/ sayanything-4808

It stands to get worse. “Scientists” have been feeding at the federal teat so long the entire scientific world in America is now starting to settle down to following whatever the common political wisdom is to get the bucks. It’s become institutionalized. If we don’t hold politicians responsible when they screw the nation and world up, we’re not going to hold the scientists responsible for bad science done strictly for a paycheck.

At the rate this is going, I wouldn’t expect anyone to be positive on a high-tech world-wide prosperity picture any time soon. Forget colonizing the moon never mind Mars. People are hearing people with degrees going on about the end of energy and how we have to settle for less. When the people who are supposed to know better repeat the nonsense of the politics, rubber stamping their luddite primitivism spewed out to panic and dispirit the population to cow them into following them and empowering the politicians, it’s a bad thing.

SayAnythingBlog.com

Global Warming Hysteria Is Destroying The Credibility Of Science

Create a SAB Readerblog

Recent Comments