Western Academia Isn’t Willing to Use the Scientific
Method to Understand the Real World
Through the lens of Trumpism, Leftist politics looks as threadbare as new jeans with holes in the knees. The old blame game, double standards, demonizing, delay, all without a care to distinguish truth from a pack of lies – according to a dog-eared anti-business, anti-Judeo/Christian, anti-white playbook – has not just lost our interest: we’re disgusted. We now see the Left even used weather as a political tool to hammer capitalism and undermine Americanism.
Do we actually need an executive order from government to restore the scientific method in American classrooms? In the real world, 2016 wasn’t the hottest year on record. Nor have the last 3 years been the hottest years on record. What is a fact is that taxpayer funds are being used to pay American universities to concoct fantastic climate change claims and advocate for the Left’s new religion of global warming.
Evidence of the politicization of AGW science since the ’70s is based on the fact that “global warming” was renamed “climate change” in the ’90s. This is a battle between those who are willing to place their faith in scientists and environmentalists whose speculations the Left finds politically useful and the rest of us who can tell the difference between fact and fiction.
And, of course, the media is part of the problem. No, McDonald’s is not the world’s largest purchaser of cow eyeballs, even if you received the news from someone on Facebook; and, you should not need to Snopes-it to know that it is fake news.
The Left wants to believe we can separate capitalism from liberalism and the now dead Democrat party believes China is proof of that. But, China has done nothing but copy and steal the intellectual property of free people. China’s communist government planners have authority to forcibly relocate centuries-old indigenous societies, who were accustomed to living on a dollar a day, to make way for mega-dams, coal-fired and nuclear power plants and engage in environmental laissez faire, but the citizens of China are unable to question or have a say in anything. Does the Left consider China as a good example of political openness?
“In the Obama era,” says WSJ’s Holman W. Jenkins (see, hockeyshtick), “it was routine for press releases to avoid mentioning any margin of error.” Didn’t we learn all about, margin of error in polls leading up to the Trump vs. Clinton election? Jenkins is more certain about one thing: “Change would be healthy at U.S. climate agencies.”
So, how about researchers who proclaimed 2016 was the warmest year ever? The 0.1° margin of error (uncertainty interval) in their data was 2.5 times larger than the 0.04° of warming above previous highs that researchers initially proclaimed (which was trumpeted in the media); and, 10 times larger compared to the researchers’ subsequently revised results of just 0.01° of warming. So what’s the real story, given the level of uncertainty? Were all previous average global temperatures exceeded in 2016 by a hundredth of a degree or was 2016’s average about a tenth of a degree below previous El Niño years (or e.g., was the 2016 average statistically indistinguishable from 1998– as satellite data reveals)?
The whole point is so crazy because the temperature is always going up or down a little. What is astonishing is that in the last 20 years it hasn’t done much of anything… there has been a big El Nino in 2016 and in recent months the temperature has been dropping back into a zero trend level. ~Richard Lindzen
This isn’t the first time we’ve seen such deceptive scientific high jinks. “NASA’s Goddard Institute, now under Mr. Hansen’s successor Gavin Schmidt,” says Jenkins, “put out a release declaring 2014 the ‘warmest year in the modern record’ when it was statistically indistinguishable from 2005 and 2010.”
Shall we posit a theory about all this? U.S. government agencies stopped mentioning uncertainty ranges because they wanted to engender a steady succession of headlines pronouncing the latest year unambiguously the hottest when it wasn’t necessarily so.
This doesn’t mean you should stop being concerned about a potential human impact on climate. But when government scientists deliberately seek to mislead, it’s a warning to raise your guard. ~H. W. Jenkins, Jr. (Ibid.)
Meanwhile, a major winter storm slams the Northeast, shutting down airports and dumping up to a foot of snow in a day. This we know and what else do we know? The idea of an accurate average global temperature is bogus to begin with. We have no surface temperatures at all for most of Earth’s surface. Modern measurements are systemically biased upward due to the improper siting of official thermometers, in cities and at airports, such that ‘tarmac’ and ‘urban heat island effects’ have corrupted the data. And, it is a joke to pretend that historical land measurements were ever meant to be considered accurate to a hundredth of a degree (more like rounded to the nearest whole degree in the eye of the beholder).
“Scientists measuring oxygen isotopes from ice cores drilled in Greenland and Antarctica… [report] temperatures were significantly warmer than today for most of the past 10,000 years.” ~James Taylor, Forbes (2016)