Skip to comments."Fake But Accurate" Science
Posted on 02/29/2012 2:17:21 PM PST by neverdem
For years, we've been lectured at by the global warming establishment about how anyone who doubts them is an enemy of science. One of them in particular, a fellow named Peter Gleick who was the chair of the American Geophysical Union's Task Force on Scientific Ethics, kept lecturing us about how much more scientific integrity the warmists have compared to us unscrupulous skeptics...
This is what makes many of us global warming skeptics so outraged. We have spent years being smeared as "anti-science," yet many of us became interested in this subject because of our reverence for science. When I was 11 years old, I encountered popularizers of science such as Isaac Asimov and Carl Sagan, and I wanted to become a physicist. I was inspired by the story of Galileo, who was forced under threat of torture to recant his discoveries about the motion of the earth but still insisted that "nevertheless it moves." I was fascinated by Sagan's recounting of the story of Johannes Kepler, who started out trying to prove a fanciful theory about how the planets moved in circular orbits reflecting the proportions of the five perfect Pythagorean solids, only to reject that theory in the face of contrary evidence and go on to discover that the planets move in elliptical orbits.
While I eventually ended up in a career as a freelance philosopher and political writer (a field that is equally fascinating, if somewhat less reputable), I retained a reverence for the basic moral and epistemological code of science: an unbreached dedication to the facts and a commitment to follow the evidence wherever it leads.
The crime of the warmists is that they have betrayed this sacred legacy, first in practice and now in theory. They have become the enemies and corrupters of science.
(Excerpt) Read more at realclearpolitics.com ...
I’m often reminded of the anecdote told by Dr. Lorraine Day regarding the difference between geriatric senile dementia, and Alzheimer’s.
When she asked this question of her department head at a hospital in San Francisco, she received a one word answer.
“They have become the enemies and corrupter’s of science.”
Not only science but everything they can, will or have stuck
their nose in. I think liberalism is a mental malfunction
like homosexuality where the victim is normally fubctional
accept for that one part of lunacy. And like the gays, they
need to learn to live with it and quit forcing it on everyone
I debated one of these warming cultists in a bar. He insisted that man’s actions were responsible for 75% of the CO2 in the atmosphere. When I asked how much of the atmosphere was CO2, he said 40%. After everyone laughed, he started screaming that Bush was a Nazi and stomped out of the bar.
Yep, the cult is composed of brilliant geniuses.
Progressivists are 180 degrees out of “true” on everything.. They corrupt everything they touch.
Science is the latest example.
To deny the Laws of Nature (which Marxism does), you deny Common Sense. The Marxists/progressives/muslims/atheists deny the basis of our Constitution—that which states our Natural Rights come from God.
This denial of the Supernatural and in that design of nature leads to absurd illogical thinking: such as there can be two men who “marry”.
Ayn Rand argued with the Marxist Catholic Donahue, that the postmodernists (Marxists) were irrational and you could not argue with them because there is no Objective Truth. Now Rand was not a Theist but she did believe in Moral Absolutes—the Ethics of Aristotle which took in the laws of nature and Universal Truths.
The left over and over again rationalizes doing bad things in the name of the common good. When Stalin murdered millions, it was in the name of the “common good” and to many at the time seemed “reasonable”.
That little bite of the apple of the common good eventually leads to horrific crimes against the very people they claim to be “helping”.
Not the 1st time in history...but that's part of how Renaissance comes about.....All in due time
“Fake but accurate’’? I don’t think so but I doubt it.