Posted on 02/10/2008 6:46:48 AM PST by Sioux-san
Some mischievous soul at William Jewell College, a smart Baptist institution outside of Kansas City, invited me to participate Tuesday in a three-person panel called “Science, Politics and Policy.”
I say “mischievous” because that person had to suspect the trouble I could cause for the star of the panel, Chris Mooney, an elfin journalist in his late twenties who had scored big in the literary/science complex with his 2005 book, The Republican War on Science.
Before the evening was through I would make the case that if there really is a war on science in America today, it is being waged by the hard left with an able assist from a largely Democratic media.
Part of the war is real. Of the last thousand acts of violence against research science, leftists—animal rights activists, eco-terrorists, anti-nuclear provocateurs-- perpetrated just about all thousand of them.
(Excerpt) Read more at cashill.com ...
A most impressive article. Kudos for doing the research. It’s wonderful to catch the libs in their weakest point...science. One of the many mysteries of the universe is how a group so completely ignorant of so many things can fake expertise. In addition, I am befuddled by those in the science community that appear to go along....just to insure funding for their project. Such callousness approaches that of the Clintons.
The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they’re ignorant. It’s just that they know so much that isn’t so.
—RONALD REAGAN
The war against science exists on four fronts. The first two are by the left and by the right. But the other two are just as deadly.
The third war against scientists is by scientists that are poor scientists. The fourth war by unethical scientists.
To explain the wars, it is necessary to describe science like a game of chess. It has very precise rules, and if you do not follow the rules, you have not done science or chess, even if you use test tubes, in one case, or a chess board and pieces in another.
Just as importantly, and still using the analogy, if you have conducted a scientific experiment by the rules, then that is *all* you have done. If you play a game of chess, then *all* you have done is play a game of chess. Neither science or chess can be interpolated or extrapolated. Doing so violates the rules.
As a comparative example, say you conduct a scientific experiment to demonstrate the existence of gravity. Once you have done so, under the strict rules of science, you have conducted an experiment. If you say that gravity even exists outside of that experiment, it is not science, it is extrapolation.
It may be true, and it may be very reasonable, but it is not science, it is something else. This is because it is outside of the rules. From the same perspective, if you play a game of chess, and you lose your queen, it does not indicate that Queen Elizabeth II is about to abdicate or die. Even if she does. This is because it has nothing to do with the game, or the rules of chess. It is something different.
The first war against science, by the left, is an effort to seize the credibility of science and co-opt it to advance a political agenda.
The second war against science, by the right, shows both a lack of faith in religious beliefs, and a belief in science. Or really a belief in what has been extrapolated from science, not science itself, using scientific rules. The right is intimidated by science so much, that it coins its beliefs into scientific terms; but with no validity, as it does not follow the rules of science.
And this leads into the third war against science, by poor scientists. They either do not understand, do not appreciate, or refuse to abide by the rules of science, yet mask their efforts to make them appear to be scientific. This has a very erosive effect on the cumulative increase in scientific knowledge. Bricks made of unfired clay, that eventually will crumble, weakening the science built on this foundation.
The fourth, and by far, the most dangerous war against science is waged by the unethical scientists. It is not just refusing the ethical limits of Dr. Frankenstein, but in actively trying to transcend such limits. And while they often follow the rules of science properly, their experiments are inhumane, destructive, insidious, and often downright evil.
Such scientists proclaim that there should be no barrier to scientific inquiry, even if it should cause untold harm, or even destroy the world itself. And this makes them the biggest threat to science at all.
Great response - I would say the assaults on Science from the Left are having a way bigger impact than the Right’s feeble attempts due mainly to a complicit Media. The Right simply doesn’t have a platform to push their agenda (if by the Right, you mean Christian literalists/creationists). You can be on the political Right and not believe in any of that. However, you wouldn’t be allowed quarter as a Lefty if you didn’t buy into most of their nonsense. It all comes down to how do we mortals interpret what pure Science shows us? That’s why in a court of law, you have to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. In science, we get told nothing beyond the results of the ‘experiment.’ Fair enough, but at least give me the parameters and prove to me that you did follow the Rules.
Where would you categorize Dr. Suzuki? I watched a little bit of his interview on the Weather Channel last night - so charming and caring. But, how evil is a scientist who promotes world-wide hysteria that could affect all of us by horrible laws being passed that will ruin economies and throw people out of work? He even said that Leaders who disagree with the Alarmists should be put in jail because it is they who are ruining the earth. http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=ZTVkMWViZmY5M2I5MTUxZTRkZmJhZjI2NjE5NjEwNzE=
Is gross irresponsibility Evil? Or do we leave that term for the Dr. Mengeles who hurt a lot of people in his rather limited world? Or is it worse than Mengele? Think about the effects of not using DDT any more and how many millions have died for no good reason...all due to junk science and ‘good intentions.’ I know - mosquito nets will do the trick!
Contemporary orthodox science is controlled by an oligarchy of grant fund junkies and ideological brahmins. Absolutely no science will be funded that does not fit into accepted doctrine, ie., big bang, black hole, dark matter and so on.
For example, the approach to anthropology known as “diffusionism” popularized by outcast scientists such as Thor Heyerdahl and Barry Fell, in which it is observed that ancient civilizations were massively ocean-going and ocean-colonizing, was made poitically incorrect by controller elements who basically couldn’t admit to themselves that ancient people had the smarts in maritime construction or geometry to navigate the globe. For generations diffusionists have been vilified and ridiculed by academia and refused access to peer-reviewed journals or university tenure.
Now, the Human Genome project data is proving that waves of migration washed the world’s shores in all directions during the bronze age, that in fact, as inventor Buckminster Fuller once claimed, the birth of civilization occurred in riparian/riverine locations precisely because of the smarts necessary to sail a boat.
You must be kidding.
Thor Heyerdahl did some good work. Have you seen his massive two volume work on Easter Island? That was respected science.
But Barry Fell?
Thor Heyerdahl had a neat boat trip, but his theory has been proven conclusively and completely wrong.
I am aware of that. That was pretty much known when he made that voyage from a study of blood types.
By good work I was referring to the archaeology he organized on Easter Island. I have the two volume set and its a good piece of work.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.