Once again, we are seeing politicians use scientists and science to support their public policy prescriptions for a fruitful future. Unfortunately, in some cases, it has lead to disaster and death.

Are there only three or four reputable scientists whose word should be taken as gospel and used to inform draconian usurpations of power and our inalienable rights?

The progressive plea to respect science…


It was precisely 100 years ago that, coming off the one-two punch of World War I and the Spanish flu, Warren Harding popularized a phrase and ran for president on the slogan “Return to Normalcy.” He won the election, but there was no normalcy. There was a roaring and rambunctious decade that ended with a Depression.

The same principle applies today. We might speak, achingly, of our pre-COVID existences, but life has changed abruptly, profoundly, and irretrievably. We will, instead, go hurtling into a new era.

The real reckoning of our age, maybe of our lifetime, is not whether we will prevail over the virus. It’s whether our respect for science, and our collective will—so muscular during the crisis—will prevail when we reboot and rebuild.

[OCS: Perhaps the question should not be one of respect for science, but the degree to which we can trust corrupt, agenda-driven politicians to pursue public policies in the name of science. Especially those public policies that concentrate control within a single political party, result in larger government, higher taxes, and fewer personal freedoms?]

Let’s start with a thought exercise: It’s New Year’s Eve heading into 2020, a number, ironically, associated with perfect vision and clarity. What’s your response that night upon being told that soon there will be no live sports or concerts or Broadway shows? That Grand Central Station at rush hour will look like this? That toilet paper might be more valuable than crude oil? That by spring, there will be food lines on the streets of New York and more than 300,000 people worldwide will have died tragically.

Looking back, Mother Earth was starting to clear her throat and make herself heard: Australian bush fires were ravaging the continent. Earth had registered its highest temperatures since records began. Icebergs and glaciers melted, popsicles in the sun; there were floods and droughts; and swarms of locusts descending on Africa.

[OCS: Anthropomorphizing our world as “Mother Earth” is not science, nor is it descriptive of our planetary dynamics. So begins another screed on settled science, the wisdom of experts, and the proclamations of activists who have made a fairly decent living with their alarmist viewpoint based on nothing more than deeply-flawed computer models and heavily manipulated input data.]

Bill McKibben was one of the early climate change whistleblowers, so to speak. Ever since, he has been issuing warnings on the danger of ignoring science. <Source>

[OCS: The question is: which science and which scientists are we to believe. Because, far from being settled as a consensus opinion, I can easily find well-credentialed, well-experienced scientists on both sides of the questions: to what extent does man-made activity influence the climate, how can these findings be independently validated or falsified, and what can man do to affect the global climate.

Climate change appears to be of renewed interest given the minimization of the sun’s activity and the likelihood of a cooling trend to balance any warming trend. In essence, regression to some mean value which remains unknown to modern science.]

The havoc wreaked by the Chinese Coronavirus is but a small taste of the devastation yet to come if we listen to the activist scientists and continue to ignore the well-credentialed skeptics…

Consider that the Chinese Coronavirus computer model developed by Professor Neil Ferguson, who led the COVID-19 modeling team at Imperial College in London, which was used to inform worldwide public opinion and policies, was grossly in error. Not only were some of the basic assumptions in error, but the model also contained approximately 150,000 lines of Fortran code. To be noted, this outmoded compiled computer language has a number of inherent flaws. The results appear to have assisted in crippling economies and bankrupting businesses and individuals. It is self-evident that the model should have been studied and validated, as well as the phenomenon the model purported to simulate. And before, the results were used to inform public policies and political power grabs.

Likewise, the global climate models have dodgy assumptions and contain hundreds of thousands of lines of code written in Fortran and lack the same type of validation.

Consider Dr. Anthony Fauci, the physician-immunologist who has served as the Director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases since 1984 and who heads President Trump’s Chinese Coronavirus Advisory Panel. Widely regarded as an expert on the Chinese Coronavirus, the truth is far different. Dr. Fauci is more of a long-time bureaucrat than a physician or researcher. Much of the information he has passed along to the public is grossly in error, and he often reminds us that models are flawed, and the data may be incomplete -- excusing his earlier pronouncements.

Likewise, the United Nation’s IPCC (International Panel on Climate Control) is comprised of politicians and policymakers, not scientists. It merely passes along research produced by others and chosen by a select group of overwhelmingly activist scientists whose institutions and projects depend on governmental funding. Why have they not allocated sufficient funds to validate models, verify data, and above all, attempt to replicate the findings used to inform public policy? The short answer is: they like what they have, and it appears accepted by the mainstream media as sufficient to drive their progressive agenda.

Apparently, anyone can build a model…

Minnesota’s COVID-19 Models Were Created Over One Weekend Partly By Students

The University of Minnesota (UMN) says it developed the predictive models used to justify Governor Tim Walz’s economic shutdowns in one weekend, enlisting the help of students.

The mathematical models used to justify Minnesota’s sweeping economic shutdowns amidst the coronavirus were hastily developed by a team partially composed of students who did not have time to fully validate their work, according to a release by UMN that boasts about the speed with which their model was created.

“I don’t think a lot of researchers get to work on something over the weekend and have public figures talk about it and make decisions based on it three days later,” says associate professor Marina Kirkeide who just completed her undergraduate degree last year. “[In this situation] you don’t have the time to validate as much as you normally would,” she adds.

Associate Professor Eva Enns who also helped build the models admits in the University release that her work cannot be used to make predictions with a great degree of accuracy, and that uncertainty figured greatly into the models’ construction. “We need to build in uncertainty as a clear message,” she says.

The University also concedes that the accuracy of its models are limited because statisticians don’t know how many people have cases of COVID-19 that are so mild they go undetected. Yet another confounding factor is the use of data reported by the ruling Communist Party of China. <Source>

Science über alles …


How Blind Faith In Scientific Expertise Wrecked The Economy

The phrase “settled science” is a classic oxymoron. There can never be science that is settled, and science cannot or should not be the only determinant of policy, especially on things related to the economic direction of the planet.

This is important due to two observable phenomena. One, this pandemic has highlighted how much of our public and social media are full of mindless drones. Two, it has highlighted just how much of our scientific consensus is flawed, and still worshiped as if it consists of matters of faith instead of evidence.

Consider the the mushrooming of Twitter-take artists. They are not scientists, or qualified in matters of economics, history, strategy, or policy. They are random individuals whose sole purpose is to remind us that we should have faith in “science and data.”

Obviously, they don’t understand having “faith” in science is in itself a fallacy of scientism. Scientism is a faith in the idea that all social problems have only one answer, through the process of science. It is a fallacy  because scientists are humans and have their own biases, as well as flawed methodologies, which is why science is constantly scrutinized and measured alongside historical and economic questions.

Scientism elevates science to the point of a religion, thereby defeating the whole purpose of scientific inquiry. Nevertheless, these prophets of scientism run all over the internet, telling us that nothing else matters, because “SCIENCE!” <Source>

It gets worse…

Now we are seeing the billionaire technocrats starting to police their platforms to remove any “contradictory” information that does not conform to government dictates or the progressive agenda – in the guise of “fact-checking.” But whose “facts?” Whose expertise? This is censorship pure and simple and is likely to concentrate the voices of the activists and their corrupt agenda to the exclusion of rational, well-considered thought from qualified experts and even commentators seeking to explore various issues. We saw what happened to the initial brave physicians and scientists in China when they tried to warn the world, do not let that happen here. Do not let the mainstream media dominate the conversation merely because they have a louder voice.

Free speech and a free press? Yeah Right!

Bottom line…

We have all seen the problems with the Coronavirus and its economic impact. Now consider that the impact of Climate Change proposals greatly outweigh the virus’s effects and are likely to cause permanent damage.

Perhaps former President Ronald Reagan’s advice, "Trust but Verify," should be the watch-phrase of the day.

We are so screwed when the mainstream media provides additional exposure and validation to climate activists whose communist agenda outranks the controlled skepticism of science. Or gives credit to virus scientists who speak with certitude about facts not in evidence.

-- steve

“Nullius in verba.”-- take nobody's word for it!

“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw

“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”

“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS

"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius

“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell

“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar

“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS