Global Warming Fraud and the Future of Science

American Thinker ^ | November 29, 2009 | J.R. Dunn

[neverdem]

The East Anglia Climate Research Unit (CRU) revelations come as no real surprise to anyone who has closely followed the global-warming saga. The Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) thesis, to give it its semi-official name, is no stranger to fraud. It would be no real exaggeration to state that it was fertilized with fraud, marinated in fraud, stewed in fraud, and at last served up to the world as prime grade-A fraud with nice side orders of fakery and disingenuousness. Damning as they may be, the CRU e-mails are merely the climactic element in an exhaustively long line.

A short tour of previous AGW highlights would include:

The Y2K Glitch.  This episode involved the NASA/GISS team led by James Hansen, possibly the most fanatical and unrelenting of all warmists, a man who makes Al Gore look like a skeptic. (Among other things, Hansen has demanded that warming "deniers" be tried for "crimes against humanity".)  While examining a series of NASA temperature graphs, Canadian statistician Steve McIntyre, himself not so much a skeptic as an anti-warming Van Helsing, uncovered a discontinuity occurring in January 2000 that raised temperatures gathered over widespread areas by 1-2 degrees Fahrenheit. McIntyre had no easy time of it, since Hansen refused to reveal what algorithm he'd used to process the data, forcing McIntyre to perform some very abstruse calculations to figure it out.

Once notified, Hansen's team promised to correct the error, stating that it was an "oversight". When the corrected figures were at last released, they rocked the church of warming from bingo hall to steeple. Vanished was the claim that the past few years were "the warmest on record". Now 1934 now took precedence. A full half of the top ten warmest years occurred before WW II, well prior to any massive CO2 buildup.

No explanation has ever been offered. We have a Y2K glitch that behaves like no other computer glitch ever encountered, uniformly affecting a large number of sources distributed almost nationwide. Although the incident trashed all recent data and raised uncomfortable questions about the warming thesis as a whole, NASA itself made no effort at an investigation or inquiry. All that we're ever going to hear is "oversight". I guess that's how they do things at NASA/GISS.

The Arctic Ice Melt. We've been informed for the better part of a decade that Arctic ice was melting at an unprecedented rate, and that the North Pole would be ice-free in twenty, thirty, or forty years, depending in the hysteria level of the media platform in question. In truth, ice thinning was due to a cyclical weather pattern in which winds blow ice floes south into warmer water. Everybody involved knew that this cycle occurred, everyone had seen it happen previously time out of mind. But it was too good an opportunity to pass up. Worse yet, when the weather returned to its normal pattern two years ago, large numbers of scientists put in considerable effort to suggest that the "new" ice was thinner than usual and would vanish in a flash as soon as the temperatures went back up. The media went along with the joke. The Germans have a phrase to cover such eventualities: this crew should be stripped of their trade. (Several expeditions setting out for the Pole to "call attention" to the coming Arctic catastrophe had to stop short due to icy conditions. In one case, both women involved suffered serious frostbite.)   

The Poor Polar Bears. Closely related is the saga of the polar bears, staring extinction in the face due to warming while, somewhere beyond the aurora, Gaia weeps bitter tears. This was evidently inspired by a single photograph (you've seen it -- the entire world has at this point) of a woebegone polar bear crouched on a melting iceberg. That bear had to be sulking over allowing a nice juicy seal to escape, because it was in no danger. Out of the twenty major polar bear populations only two are known to be decreasing. Estimates of bear population (there are no exact figures) have increased over the past forty years, from 17,000 to19,000 to the current number of 22,000 to 27,000. The bears are becoming pests in municipalities such as Churchill and Point Barrow. (As clearly shown here.)  Despite all this, last year the bear was put on the U.S. "endangered" list.

The Hockey Stick That Wasn't. The "hockey stick" is a nickname for a chart prepared by Michael Mann, a University of Pennsylvania professor and leading warmist. The chart purports to show temperature levels for the past millennium, and consists of a straight line until it reaches the late 20^th century, when it suddenly shoots upward, creating the "hockey stick" profile. This chart was a major feature of International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) reports on global warming and is a commonly-used media graphic.

This chart creates immediate doubt in anyone knowledgeable about the climate of the past millennium, which more resembles a roller coaster than a straight line. It developed -- in yet another impressive McIntyre takedown, this time with an assist from Ross McKitrick -- that Mann was utilizing an algorithm that would produce hockey sticks if you fed it telephone numbers. (Mann is the "Mike" mentioned in the CRU e-mails, and this is one of his "tricks".) Despite this disclosure, Mann has never withdrawn the chart, offered an explanation, or made a correction. The chart remains an accepted piece of evidence among warmists.

Tree-Ring Circus. Due to the fact that direct temperature measures for past epochs are lacking, climatologists utilize "proxy measures", such as tree rings, glacial moraines, and lake sediments. Tree rings have played an important part in the warming controversy, as evidence backing the claim that temperatures have been consistently lower worldwide until recently. A crucial series of measurements, utilized by Mann among others, involves trees located on the Yamal peninsula in Siberia. How many trees were measured, you ask? A hundred? A thousand? Ten thousand?

The answer is twelve. A number perfectly adequate to trigger international panic, overthrow the capitalist system, establish a Green totalitarianism, and completely turn Western culture on its head.

But it turns out that further measurements were in fact made in the area, involving at least thirty-four other trees. And when this data is added to the original twelve, then the warming evidence disappears into the same branch of the Twilight Zone as the blade of Mann's hockey stick. Another "oversight", you understand.

We could go on to mention the automated U.S. weather stations chronicled by the tireless Anthony Watts, which were conscientiously placed next to air-con vents, atop sewage plants, in parking lots, and in one case, in a swamp (as many as 90% may be giving spurious high readings). The glaciers that are vanishing worldwide except where they aren't. The endless papers demonstrating that the coral reefs, along with various birds, animals, insects, and plants, are facing extinction even though no warming whatsoever has occurred for twelve years. (And in the thirty years before that, the total rise was 1.25 degrees Fahrenheit, easily within normal variation.) Powerful stuff, this warming -- it maims and destroys even when it's not happening.  

It's within this context that the East Anglia e-mails must be judged. The vanishingly small number of  legacy media writers who are paying attention behave as if the messages comprise some kind of puzzling anomaly, with no relation to anything that came before. In truth, they stand as the internal memos from the East Anglia branch of the Nigerian National Bank, which can save us from the horrors of global warming after payment of a small up-front fee.

There is always a deeper level to the damage caused by fraud. It strains social relationships, generates cynicism, and debases standing institutions. What has suffered the most damage from AGW is faith in the scientific method, the basic set of procedures -- it could be called an algorithm -- governing scientific investigation. These procedures embody simplicity itself: you examine a phenomenon. You gather data. You construct a hypothesis to explain that phenomenon. And then...

Well, first, let's cover what you don't do.

• You don't manipulate data. (As CRU chief scientist Phil Jones stated he was doing in the now-famous "Mike's trick" e-mail, not to mention throughout the now-famous source code.)

• You don't fabricate data. (As one CRU scientist did while compiling weather-station data. Running into problems, he states, "I can make it up. So I did." He adds an evil smiley face. This e-mail has gone under radar up until now. It can be found in the comments on James Delingpole's blog.

• You don't deny data to other investigators. (As Hansen, Jones, and, it appears, everybody else in the warming community has done at one time or another.)

• You don't destroy evidence. (As the members of the CRU did following a Freedom of Information request.)

• You don't bury contradictory data. (As Jones and several colleagues did in an attempt to undercut the impact of the Medieval Warming Period.)

• You don't secretly manipulate the argument from behind the scenes. (As the CRU staff did with the website Realclimate.org., screening comments to allow only those that supported the warming thesis.)

• You don't secretly undercut your critics. (As Mann advised the CRU to do concerning the scientific journal, Climate Researh: "I think we have to stop considering ‘Climate Research' as a legitimate peer-reviewed journal. Perhaps we should encourage our colleagues in the climate research community to no longer submit to, or cite papers in, this journal.")

• You don't try to get a journal editor critical of your case fired. (As the CRU staff evidently succeeded in doing with an editor for Geophysical Research Letters.)

What you do, if you are a serious scientist operating according to the established method, is attempt to falsify your hypothesis. Test it to destruction; carry out serious attacks on its weakest points to see if they hold up. If they do -- and the vast majority of hypotheses suffer the indignity embodied in a phrase attributed variously to Thomas Huxley and Lord Kelvin: "a beautiful theory slain by an ugly fact" -- then you have a theory that can be published, and tested, and verified by other scientists. If you don't, you throw it out.

None of this, amidst all the chicanery, fabrications, and manipulations, appears to have been done by anyone active in global warming research, the CRU least of all. From which point we are forced to conclude that AGW is not science, and that any "consensus" that can drawn from it is a consensus of fraud. 

(The late-breaking revelations of temperature manipulations at New Zealand's NiWA institute   -- another one of Mike's tricks? -- merely underlines the lesson of CRU. Now that the dam has busted, we'll be hearing dozens of stories like this over the weeks and months to come.)

The West is a technological society. Science is as responsible for making us what we have become as any other factor, including the democratic system of government. The two are in fact complementary, each supporting and encouraging the other across the decades since this country was established. (And yes, I am aware that Britain and Germany were both centers of scientific progress, both of them nations liberalized by the example of the United States. Even the utterly authoritarian Bismarck was forced to heed the voice of the people despite his inclination to do anything but.)

The technology developed from scientific research has created a world that would be unrecognizable to our forebears of even a century ago. Technology has transformed diet, health, communications, and transportation. It has doubled lifespans in advanced countries. Prior to the modern epoch, few ever caught a glimpse of the world past their own farming fields. India, China, and Africa were wild myths, the Pacific and Antarctica utterly unknown, the planets and stars merely pretty lights in the sky. Technology opened the world, not just for everyday men and women, but for invalids, the disabled, and the subnormal, who once lived lives of almost incomprehensible deprivation. Technology was a crucial factor in the dissolution of the ancient empires, the humbling of the aristocracies.

As Paul Johnson has pointed out, a technological breakout appeared imminent at a number of points in the past millennium. Consider the anonymous Hussite engineer of the 15^th century who left a notebook even more breathtaking than that of Leonardo, or the revolutionary English Levelers of the 17^th century who dreamed of flying machines and factories. If a breakout had occurred at those times, the consequences would have been unimaginable. But the Hussites were destroyed by the German princes, the Levelers by the reestablishment of the English crown. It required the birth of a true democratic republic in the late 18^th century to provide the setting for a serious scientific-technical takeoff, one that after 200 years has brought us to where we stand today, gazing out at the galaxies beyond the galaxies with the secret of life itself within reach.

It is this, and no less, that scientific fraud threatens. This is no trivial matter; it involves one of the basic elements of modern Western life. When scientific figures lie, they lie to all of us. If they foment serious distrust of the scientific endeavor -- as they are doing -- they are creating a schism in the heart of our culture, a wound that in the long run could prove even more deadly than the Jihadi terrorists.

Such failings are not relegated only to climatology. With the apparent success of the climate hustlers, it has infected all areas of research. Over the past decade, stem-cell studies have proven a hotbed of fraud. Recall Dr. Hwang Woo Suk, the South Korean biologist who claimed to have cloned various higher animals and isolated new stem cell lines, to worldwide applause. Suk was discovered to have faked all his research, prompting the South Korean government to ban him from taking part in any further work. Nor was he alone. Researchers throughout the field have been caught fabricating and manipulating data, and at least one large biotech company has developed the habit of announcing grand breakthroughs to goose its stock prices.

A number of factors are responsible, among them the grant-making process, which rewards extravagant claims and demands matching results, and the superstar factor, in which media adulation creates a sense of intellectual arrogance -- as in the case of Dr. Suk -- unmatched since Galileo's heyday. But the major problem lies in politics, specifically as involves ideology.

In both major recent cases of fraud, science had become entwined and infected with ideology to a point where its very nature had been transformed. It was no longer science in the classic mold, boldly asking basic questions without fear or favor. It had become an ideological tool, carrying out only such research as met with the approval of political elites. Stem-cell research had become enmeshed with the abortion question. Embryonic stem cells, obtained by "processing" aborted babies, received the lion's share of funding and attention despite its showing no potential whatsoever. Adult stem cells, obtainable from bone marrow, skin cells, or virtually any other part of the body, were shunted aside despite extraordinarily promising research results. This bias permeated the entire field and distorted all perceptions of it -- one of the reasons Dr. Suk was so wildly overpraised was his willingness to attack Pres. George W. Bush for limiting embryonic stem-cell exploitation.

The climatology story is little different. Environmentalist Greens needed a threat, one that menaced not only technological civilization but life on earth itself. They had promoted an endless parade of such threats since the 1960s -- overpopulation, pollution, runaway nuclear power, and global cooling -- only to see them shrivel like popped balloons. They required a menace that was overwhelming, long-term, and not easily disproven. With warming, the climatologists gave them one. In exchange for sky-high funding, millennial scientists, the heirs of Bacon, Copernicus, and Einstein, men who bled and suffered for the sake of their work, continually inflated the nature and extent of the CO2 threat, using, as we now know, the sleaziest methods available. The result has been complete intellectual degradation. 

Scientists were once among the most trusted figures in Western public life, similar to bankers, priests, and doctors, but in a real sense standing above them all. Scientists were honored as truth-tellers, aware that their reputation for veracity and seriousness was their only real asset. And while exceptions existed (read the story of Blondlot and his N-rays,   for one example), the public took them at their own valuation.

That is ended, one with the scholastic monasteries and the academy at Athens. Scientists today are well on their way to becoming an amalgam of the cheap politician and the three-card monte dealer. They are viewed by the less educated as a privileged class making alarming and impudent claims for their own benefit. The better informed find ourselves in the uncomfortable position of being unable to defend something we once admired.

The next set of questions in physics cannot be answered without equipment costing billions at the very least, and possibly much more. Will a disbelieving public pay for that? We are facing serious dilemmas concerning breakthroughs in biology, not only in stem-cell technology but also in neurology and synthetic biology, breakthroughs that threaten to distort the very nature of humanity itself. Should we leave the solutions up to people who want us to pick a card, any card?

The collaboration between science and democracy is one of the great achievements of human history. It is now threatened by the behavior of people at the very heart of that collaboration. If it is destroyed, something of unparalleled value will have vanished, something that will be nearly impossible to replace. If the Western world wishes to continue its magnificent upward journey, we will have to save science from itself. An errant and corrupt climatology is the place to start.

[betty boop]

Witchcraft, indeed.

The preferred scenario....

It gives all the power to human imagination, without constraint — that is, the imagination has no limit, it owes nothing to anything beyond its own confabulations by which such may be tested for truth value.

It makes man the measure....

But hallucinatory experiences of this kind do not change the nature or structure of Reality, only the way the man experiences it. Reality is indestructible; man is not. Ergo, man's experience does not, cannot, determine Reality: He is a participant in it, not the Maker of it.

But the temptation to witchcraft is oh! so ancient....

Thank you, dear brother in Christ, for writing!

[betty boop]

I suspect the critter from Mars would have more sense . . . providing he wasn’t a fallen angel . . .

Funny, but I wonder about questions like that myself nowadays, dear brother in Christ!

[betty boop]

That explains a lot......

Yep. Sure does to me. :^)

[CottShop]

[[Bite your tongue, dear brother in Christ! What is it with all this “doom-saying?”]]

Thanks, now my tongue is bleeding.

Well, I’ve just got this sinking feeling, after reading how all the nations are ignoring climategate, and pushing for copenhagen mandates, that obama is simply goign to ram through massive agreements in copenhagen. I’ve watched him give america them iddle finger ever since he in essence told America to screw off when he said his relationship with the ‘REv’ wright’, and has continued doing so calling teaprty folks a derogatory homosexual term, Sicking his SEIU THUGS on protestors who simply wanted their voices heard by this administration, and telling hard working citizens to shut up and ‘let him fix the mess we caused’, and now, watchign him go ful lsteam ahead to copenhagen- He’s got a consistant track record of not listenign to the citizens, and doign just as he pleases

[[Alternatively: This situation would be absolutely hilarious, were it not so deadly serious — and dangerous.]]

Exactly- this global warming caused by man scam is a VERY serious issue, and one that will undoubtably cause peopel to go hungry, possibly even being deadly to those hwo simpyl won’t be able to afford anymore taxes, fines, and mandates.

[[Fact is, Copenhagen couldn’t become American law just on The Big 0’s say-so. His treaty power is limited by the “advice and consent” role of the Senate.]]

Yeah, I know, and that’s our only real hope- but there’s two scenarios that can take place here- #1: The democrats collectively decide to commit politcal suicide by ramming this collosal fraud through, agaisnt the will of the people, so that their Dear Leader will go down in history as ‘The only president who ‘cared abotu the environment’ and did soemthign about it (despite the fact that nothign we do can EVER change the climate an iota), or two- soem dems wil lbail on him, preferign to stand a possible chance of reelection.

I’d say that theoretically speasking, one woudl think the latter was goign to happen- however, Obama has said several times now that he’s willing to sacrifice a second term in order to impliment his mandates- He’s gung-ho to go down in history as a ‘legend’ even htough it’ll only be in his own mind- and There’s another fact here too that factors in- The democrats are tryign to reduce the amount of needed votes to what? 56 now? 54? or whatever they are tryign to call for- claiming that ‘nothign ever gets passed because of stonewalling and non-coloperation’ so they’re trying to pull a fast one here, and may very well do so friom what I’m reading

[[(This is just one of the “pesky ways” the federal Constitution throws up barriers to his ambition. I expect he just hasn’t quite figured out how to get around this one yet.... )]]

See my reply above-

[[And it takes 67 senators to concur before any treaty can become American law. ]]

I wasn’t aware of that- thought it was only 60?

[[The good news is: the Senate refused to ratify the Kyoto Treaty.]]

Under Pres. Bush though- with majority repub- remember- we’re dealign with power hungry, money-grubbing democrats who, as I’ve thought all along now, will grab whatever they can while they have the ‘opportunity’ knowing they are not goign to last very long in power after obama rams through all his tax and spend mandates- they figure “We’re out anyways, let’s grab our ‘piece of the pie’ while it’s still hot and plenty

[[Since Copenhagen is little more than The Second Coming of Kyoto — which was fundamentally a profound attack on American sovereignty (as well as the sovereignty of every other Nation-State in the world) — then one hopes the Senate will continue to refuse to “go along.” ]]

I sure hope you’re right. But I have serious doubts, and hte reason why is explained above- I used to run a blog which followed the climate scam for about 3 years- I finally gave up, thinking it was never goign to end, because I saw scientyist after scientists speak out agaisnt hte scam, only to be either ignored or ridiculed and bullied by the agendists. I had reposted reams of evidence showing ‘man-caused’ global warmign to be a scam, and showing it to be purely natural, and operfectly expected- and had reams of evidence refuting many of them ore extravagent claism by the alarmists- You can’t imagine how frustrated I became knowing hte mainstream media was doing everythign in their power to silence anty opposition to their religious agenda.

My hopes spiked a bit when this climategate issue broke, but, watchign the world leaders totally ignore climategate, and knowing obama and his disdain for Aemricans

[[But one anticipates The Big 0 can find “helpers” in the Senate, by hook or by crook....]]

Or by 300 million dollar bribes

I’ll certainly hope for the best, and try to contact folks like Inhofe, and others who have been tryign right along to expose the scam, but they have been, and wil lbe, up against a bunch of money-grubbing thugs who care nothign about facts or the will of the people- and again, the tax and spend democrats know they only have a limited time to extort as much money as possible from we the people- nkowing full well that they will most likely be ousted, and it’s my impression that we are goign to be scammed despite the revelations that it is a scam

[CottShop]

[[What fascinates me is to look at how well this fraud has been sold to the public. If your kids are in school, they’ve been well indoctrinated in it. It has been pushed in all of the media, and almost no one dares to deny it in public. This is classic naked-emperor stuff in which people who see the king in his underwear are shouted down and mau-maued into silence.]]

Exactly, and that’s precisely why we can’t fight it- Even powerful folks like Inhofe can’t fight this, because the left owns public education, owns the media, owns every propagandist outlet known practically, and they are pushing for even more control by goign after conservative voices, and proposing constitution violating mandates liek the ‘fairness doctrine’

[[They took something that wasn’t true, changed the data, and essentially dared anyone to call them on it.]]

EXACTLY- they stuck their middle finger in our faces and glared at us, and dared us to try to stop them

[[And almost no one did, so intimidated were they,]]

again- EXACTLY- those that did try- got maligned, ridiculed, insulted, and bullied into silence, Ostracised, and ignored by the mainstream medai- and htose that tried via teaparties, were intimidated by obama’s thugs SEIU

[[This was the biggest money-laundering scheme, the biggest Madoff securities scam, and the biggest power grab in history, and it almost worked.]]

It still very well may work- the PM of Australia just came out claiming he represents the ‘commonwealth’ of some 2 billion people who ‘want climate change mandates’ to ‘save the planet’- Again- they are stickign hteir middle figner in our faces and essentially saying “Yeah, it’s a scam- it got exposed... but we dare you to try to stop us- we WILL ruin you IF you try!!!”

Great post Marron- You described the exact issues underlying htis scam perfectly

[CottShop]

Here’s the commonwealth I was refering to- it looks liek they are simpyl going to ignore climategate, and go right ahead with scamming ‘rich nations’ as though no scandal ever existed- that’s mainly why I’ve got a sinking feelign they are goign to ram this through- even here in the states.

“World leaders spruik climate deal chances

“Hopes for a new global climate pact have risen after rich nations at the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting (CHOGM) in Trinidad and Tobago offered to help poorer countries bear the costs of implementing any deal.”

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2397138/posts

[xzins]

If we took all 6.7 billion people in the entire world and put them in a square 3 ft by 3 ft, they would all fit in southern Ohio. If we gave each family its own quarter acre lot with a house, they’d all fit in a box formed from Mississippi west to New Mexico and Mississippi north to Minnesota, about 1000 miles on a side and that’s adding streets.

At that point, the entire remainder of the planet would be totally empty.

I worked out on my back 40 today and didn’t see a single soul....and it’s the first day of deer-gun season.

My point: the human footprint isn’t as large as some would have you think.

[tacticalogic]

An interesting question is why is science abandoning its "professional ethics?" Especially since it should be obvious that if science turns its back on ethical criteria, it undermines its own method and instantly ceases to be science.

"Science" is a pursuit. "Scientists" are people. "Science" has abandoned nothing. A group of scientists abandoned their professional ethics. You have already answered the "why" - it's all about money, prestige, influence, and — finally — POWER (political and financial) .

Trying to make these people the personification of "science" does a disservice to all the honest scientists out there.

[Quix]

There are persistent allegations that the elites have a variety of witchcraft initiatioins into their ruling circles . . . whether the sacrificing literally of their children in a horrific bloody ritual or buggering little boys . . .

entirely believable given certain givens.

They have clearly been foisting on the public at large around the world a list of horrific delusions and fantasies as facts for a long time.

And, as Scripture declares, God Himself has surrendered a number of folks/souls to DELUSION because of their rebelions against Him.

Dreadfully sad.

In the end, there will be vivid object lessons of what rebellion against Him results in vs what Love of and submission to Him results in.

[Quix]

Quite so.

[TXnMA]

"Trying to make these people the personification of "science" does a disservice to all the honest scientists out there. "

Thank you...

[CottShop]

[[My point: the human footprint isn’t as large as some would have you think.]]

Exactly, but the global disaster alarmists use msoke and mirror alarmism to fool everyone into thinking the world can’t sustain too many more people- and when you bring up the fact that you just mentioned, they retort “Yeah, but who would want to live i na 3x3 square? That’s unreasonable’ as though that argument somehow refutes the FACT that there’s a hell of a lot of space on this planet- or they’ll throw out somehtign like “Yeah, but a lot of the ‘space’ is ocean or jungle or desert (which of course is just another smoek and mirror misdirection meant to distract the potential convert from noticing that there stil lwoudl remain a hell of a lot of open space untouched and uncivilized)

[CottShop]

[[And, as Scripture declares, God Himself has surrendered a number of folks/souls to DELUSION because of their rebelions against Him.]]

It’s a very fearful and dreadful thing when God turns His face from someone, and hands them over to the evil one because of their rebellion against Him- The Evil One gladly takes any such folks and torments them day and night with delusions and lost sanity, tremors and tremblings. as you said, a very sad thing indeed

[1010RD]

Great article. Again, thanks for posting.

The collaboration between science and democracy is one of the great achievements of human history.

The author gets it wrong here, and I know he's writing to a certain audience. But, the real collaboration was between science and religion, both pursuits of truth in their own spheres.

This alliance came to fruition in the West and particularly in America (with help from the ancients including Muslims who helped preserve even older knowledge). What we are seeing is the decoupling of religion, particularly the moral foundation of the Judeo-Christian traditions. The result is moral relativism where the ends justify the means.

There are sincere Greens, but on balance they're watermelons. Old school communists that desire the destruction of the West and America in particular through any means. The confluence of money and power just make it easier. At the end of the day, what is at stake is the truth itself.

There is no neutral in this war.

[Quix]

INDEED.

Soberingly horrific even to contemplate from a distance.

[Alamo-Girl]

(BB & A-G, can you recall the last time one of us claimed we had "PROOF" -- of anything?)

Of course not! After all, you are a scientist.

As you say, the word "proof" only applies in mathematics and trial law.

[Alamo-Girl]

Those who do not have that "love of discovery" that "drives" a true scientist simply cannot comprehend how destructive the mere concept of "foregone conclusion that must be 'proven'" is to the bedrock foundation of the scientific endeavour.

Precisely so, dear brother in Christ!

[Alamo-Girl]

Truly, I pray marron's "almost worked" is prophetic.

Thank you all so very much for your wonderful insights!

[spirited irish]

betty remarked: Then Our Hero returns with Caesar’s laurels to his fawning Left Progressive audience here, including whoever else The Big 0 has conned into thinking he is a “great man” [or at least a politically useful one].

Spirited: The circle must be made complete before we can clearly see it as a circle and not merely an arc. That said, consider the following quote from “In the Shadow of Leviathan....http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2377776/posts

“The initial testing grounds was conducted upon our Holy Russia,” notes Mishin, “and a bloody test it was.”

Who financed the bloody test? “Wall Street,” says Mishin.

In his book “The Naked Capitalist,” W. Cleon Skousen exposes the unholy alliance of bankers and capitalists collectively defined as “Wall Street” by Mishin. Skousen verifies his findings through the writings of Dr. Carroll Quigley, both a professor of history at the Foreign Service School at Georgetown University and mentor to Bill Clinton. In his opus, “Tragedy and Hope,” Quigley deliberately reveals one of the world’s best-kept secrets: the existence of a gigantic leviathan of political and economic power poised to seize control of the planet.

The gargantuan power complex says Quigley, has been - right from the start - controlling Marxist-Communist-Socialist groups,

“...the power that...Left-wingers exercised was never their own power or communist power but...the power of the international financial coterie.” (p. 954, Tragedy and Hope)

Why did Quigley expose the existence of the global financial coterie? Because he says, it is now too late for the little people to turn the tide. He urges them to not fight the noose that is already around their necks, for they will only hang themselves.

“On the other hand, those who go along with the immense pressure which is beginning to be felt by all humanity will eventually find themselves in a man-made millennium of peace and prosperity.” (Skousen, The Naked Capitalist, pp. 4-6) See the funders here: http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/guideDes c.asp?type=funder

Today, there is at least one well-respected ‘right-wing’ website that refuses to publish “In the Shadow....” Why? Because of the “Wall Street” connection. Supposedly, Wall Street is on the side of traditional values America. And while there yet remain many business leaders who are loyal to traditional values America, a check of Horowitz’s website, DiscovertheNetwork/Funders will reveal the extent to which powerful Wall Street insiders support a globalist NWO, which means that very large numbers of Americans unknowingly work for and spend their hard-earned dollars in businesses that are betraying all of us.

For example: Do you buy Playboy? Use porn? Then you are unwittingly financing the destruction of traditional values America. Is your favorite soft-drink Coca Cola? Coke, along with 100 other Wall Street insiders is spearheading a drive to impose a global tax on Americans. Again, check out Horowitz’s website.

Our Republic’s founders warned that only a well-informed, virtuous people—people characterized by impulse control-— can be a free people.

Truth is often bitter, and the bitter truth is that moral corruption and ignorance rather than virtue and true knowledge characterizes the majority of Americans today. And as corrupt people are characterized by lack of impulse control,-—their eyes are bigger than their stomachs, wallets, etc-—they naturally elect leaders who likewise lack impulse control in order to ‘get what they want.’ Consider for example, the voters who keep Barney Franks in office.

And now the connection between corrupt leaders-—including corrupt educationists-— and corrupt bankers-Wall Street insiders comes into focus, for it’s insider Wall Street corporatists and bankers who market the addictive vices, ie. porn, sex, McMansions for ‘everyone,’ etc. Meanwhile, corrupt media floods the airwaves with seductive vice and propaganda, corrupt educationists dumb Americans down, and corrupt politicians, jurists, etc. obligingly redefine vice as ‘new rights,’——modernity’s version of yesterday’s ‘bread and circuses.’ Voila! A manipulable ‘barbarian constituency motivated by destructive impulses’-—a weapon of both destruction and control-— has been created by globalists who wield it against traditional values forces and America itself.

[tacticalogic]

Wall Street letting Playboy fall into bankruptcy must be a clever ruse.