Prostituting Science

| February 10, 2014

Over at Forbes, Patrick Michaels, Director of the Center for the Study of Science at the Cato Institute and a senior fellow in research and economic development at George Mason University, has written a serious and thought-provoking piece regarding the deleterious impact of the fraud of global warming on the world scientific community. Michaels, citing an article in the Australian literary journal, Quadrant, by Garth Paltridge, whom Michaels characterizes as one of the world’s most respected atmospheric scientists, posits a harsh view of the inevitable and devastating impact of the current climate change hysteria on future scientific research.

For those of us who have smelled a rat since the outset of this latest “sky is falling” phenomenon, there’s little in the article to surprise us and a whole lot of material to support “I told ya so’s.” As we Deniers long suspected, Paltridge and Michaels lay the blame for the specious science supporting the Goreist fanaticism right at the feet of leftist politics and federal funding. Says Paltridge:

“…the average man in the street, a sensible chap who by now can smell the signs of an oversold environmental campaign from miles away, is beginning to suspect that it is politics rather than science which is driving the issue.”

And then continues with this:

“Science changed dramatically in the 1970s, when the reward structure in the profession began to revolve around the acquisition of massive amounts of taxpayer funding that was external to the normal budgets of the universities and federal laboratories. In climate science, this meant portraying the issue in dire terms, often in alliance with environmental advocacy organizations. Predictably, scientists (and their institutions) became addicted to the wealth, fame, and travel in the front of the airplane:

“A new and rewarding research lifestyle emerged which involved the giving of advice to all types and levels of government, the broadcasting of unchallengeable opinion to the general public, and easy justification for attendance at international conferences — this last in some luxury by normal scientific experience, and at a frequency previously unheard of.”

Every incentive reinforced this behavior, as the self-selected community of climate boffins now began to speak for both science and in the service of drastic regulatory policies. In the measured tones of the remarkably lucid and precise writer that he is, Paltridge explains how the corner got painted:

“The trap was fully sprung when many of the world’s major national academies of science (such as the Royal Society in the UK, the National Academy of Sciences in the USA and the Australian Academy of Science) persuaded themselves to issue reports giving support to the conclusions of the IPCC [the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change]. The reports were touted as national assessments that were supposedly independent of the IPCC and of each other, but of necessity were compiled with the assistance of, and in some cases at the behest of, many of the scientists involved in the IPCC international machinations. In effect, the academies, which are the most prestigious of the institutions of science, formally nailed their colors to the mast of the politically correct.

Since that time three or four years ago, there has been no comfortable way for the scientific community to raise the specter of serious uncertainty about the forecasts of climatic disaster.”

Michaels closing quote from the Paltridge article is this:

“In the light of all this, we have at least to consider the possibility that the scientific establishment behind the global warming issue has been drawn into the trap of seriously overstating the climate problem — or, what is much the same thing, of seriously understating the uncertainties associated with the climate problem — in its effort to promote the cause. It is a particularly nasty trap in the context of science, because it risks destroying, perhaps for centuries to come, the unique and hard-won reputation for honesty which is the basis of society’s respect for scientific endeavor.”

There it is from an eminent climate scientist, just what we here at American Thinker have been suspecting all along. Global warming is a both scam perpetrated by greedy opportunists like Al Gore, as well as a cult composed of those disaster-dependent ding-a-lings among us who have no incentive in life if that life is not imminently threatened by whatever the latest perceived threat may be; and lastly by a bunch of avaricious academics willing to sell their scientific souls to that big government devil for a place to nose into the trough of federal funding for research.

I’m not sure it’s quite as bad as Paltridge predicts but I do know that for me, someone’s scientific credentials on whatever I read from now on will be immediately met with a cynical,

“So who funded your study?”

Crossposted from American Thinker

Category: It's science!

Comments (13)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Hondo says:

    “When money speaks, the truth is silent.” — Russian Proverb

    Apparently this is true among scientists of all nations today.

  2. RangerX says:

    Don’t disparage prostitutes like that…..

  3. Ex-PH2 says:

    …which explains why they can’t explain this whole Siberian winter in North America, which is setting some records here and there.

    Climate scientists in general are about one inch deep intellectually. Their most infamous booboo was the ‘climategate’ leak of e-mails regarding how some of them don’t really believe their own reports but they need the money to live on, and other, similar stuff.

  4. Just An Old Dog says:

    Climate Change is an ongoing process and has been for millions of years. Im a big believer in conservation, but not an idiot.

  5. MGySgtRet says:

    This whole thing was a boondoggle to make people rich. Since no lay person would dare question a scientist, this scam seemed foolproof. And it worked for awhile, aided and abetted by the Mainstream Media who are willing shills.

    The scientific community has been hurt badly by all of this since it divided the believers in climate change from those who questioned the “science” involved and got raked over the coals for not believing. This is all just a money scam that has gotten legs in America because of frauds like Al Gore and some of his Hollywood pals who jumped on the bandwagon. Plus of course the media aiding at every turn.

    I believe that some of this was perpetrated to stick another knife in George Bush and his supposed “anti-science” stance. This was a lie of course but the media jumped on it. And the true believers just keep making it up as they go along. Global Warming got flipped to Climate Change to explain the fluctuations in measurements that showed the earth was not heating up as much as was predicted.

    Jesus Christ, back in the 70’s they predicted a new Ice Age. Follow the money. That leads to some pretty disturbing conclusions on the “science” of climate change.

  6. Farflung Wanderer says:

    I would not mind some Global Warming right about now. It was -10 last night, and -3 at the bus stop this morning where I’m at.

    There is some desperation involved to change your ecodisaster from something specific like “Global Warming” to the most general thing imaginable, “Climate Change”. I really hope this myth vanishes like the “Global Cooling” in the 70s and the “Ozone Holes” in the 80s and 90s.

  7. OWB says:

    Some of us remember when science was all about discovery and logical thinking. You studied stuff and postulated theories based upon the data available at the moment, knowing full well that every theory changed as more data became available.

    Took a lot of science courses and knew a lot of scientists back in the day. It didn’t occur to them to be offended by new information. They actually took delight when new discoveries took them all in new directions.

  8. Ex-PH2 says:

    Yes, there is still a big hole over Antarctica that they simply can’t explain since we were all supposed to stop using those nasty propellants that were ‘known’ to be the cause of it. Hmmmm….

    Oh, well. We’ve had the largest number of below average cold days (meaning 10 to 20 degrees below average) since the winter of 1884-85, in the upper midwest.

    Climate change: it’s not just for the Goreberites any more.

  9. HS Sophomore says:

    Ok, let’s just set aside the question of global warming fer a sec. Let’s just consider, hypothetically, what it would take to disprove the theory of man-made climate change. What would that look like? Because the way I’m hearing it now, every climate advocate is taking every weather pattern and turning it into proof that we’re on the verge of a catastrophic meltdown. If it’s dry, it’s because global warming is causing a drought. If it’s wet, it’s because global warming is causing a flood. And of course any kind of chaotic weather is held up as a sign of imminent catastrophe. What gives?

  10. faboutlaws says:

    Really glad you guys are strongly aboard on this one. Your common sense on most everything makes this site one of my favorites.

  11. streetsweeper says:

    I have been vindicated and now I have a couple of holes in the ozone layer for sale. Dirt cheap! Too bad those same scientists may never be trusted by anyone outside of their little circles.

  12. thebesig says:

    Thisainthell.us has a counterpart that argues against those advancing the made global warming cannard. I’ve been following this blog, Ice Age Now, for years, and their long term predictions, based on actual science, has been holding:

    http://iceagenow.info/

    The perils of global warming, you go blind and you lose your nose: 😀

    http://iceagenow.info/2014/02/perils-global-warming/

  13. Ex-PH2 says:

    HS Sophomore, let’s just take climate science with a grain of salt.

    Read up on the Medieval Warm Period, which ended around 1304 with the eruption of two Icelandic volcanoes, followed by two years of nonstop rain in Europe, followed by the Little Ice Age, during which Swiss glaciers advanced and began to threaten villages that had been built at their feet. Consider that the ergot fungus, which causes ergot poisoning and thrives in a damp climate, was the most likely source of erratic behavior in people that came to be labeled witchcraft.

    Then take into consideration that many thousands of years ago, caves in Spain on the Atlantic coast, which are now submerged, were high and dry and occupied by humans back then, because the Atlantic ocean levels were 400 feet lower than they are now.

    Also take into consideration that because climate cycles are based on a large number of variables, including changes in the Earth’s orbit from circular to oval, tectonic activity which includes catastrophic eruptions, and long-term deep ocean current exchanges, as in the thermohaline overturn, there is no way on the green earth anyone can justify saying that ice ages come on an average of 100,000 years – which is something that these phony-baloney ‘scientists’ insist on doing. Averages, you see, allow them to build computer models. However, their models are flawed because they are based on false information.

    I made an Excel chart of the actual time lengths for ice advances and warming periods. The shortest warming period was the Aftonian, 330,000BC to 300,000BC (30,000 years long), preceded by the longest ice advance which was the Nebraskan at 470,000BC to 330,000BC (140,000 years long).

    My chart shows plainly that ‘averaging’ the warm/ice periods is not just a fallacy, it is VERY BAD SCIENCE because it gives a false result.

    We’re 18,000 years into the current warming trend, which includes the ice advance that occurred 12,500 years ago during the Younger Dryas, when an ice dam holding the Laurention ice sheet broke and a massive dump of cold freshwater reached the Atlantic Ocean and shut down the thermohaline circulation.

    As far as I’m concerned, most climate scientists are good for just one thing: 10-day weather forecasts. And even then, they frequently come up short. Last year, we had a terrible hurricane (Sandy) that wiped out more than a few neighborhoods on the East Coast. Nothing since then. The Atlantic is too cold right now. The heat went north in the Pacific and this massive pool of warm water kinked up the jet stream, which is why we’ve had Siberian winter in the lower 48.

    But did those clever people figure that out? Did they take into account that the thermohaline overturn has its own agenda and doesn’t give a crap what they think? No. They’re too busy grasping at straws. There’s a current off the coast of Iceland that these clever people didn’t know about until about 5 years ago, and they don’t know what to do about it.

    They also tend to forget that the Atlantic holds the ‘memory’ of severe storms like Hurricane Sandy for up to 10 years and then sends that turmoil into Europe.

    There is plenty of evidence in mud cores from the African coast to show that the Sahara can turn wet and green or dry up in a single human generation. Ditto, ice advances. Given the right circumstances, they can revive in the blink of an eye.

    And there’s not a cotton pickin’ thing those scientists can do about it, but they’ll never admit to that. It would mean that they don’t know what the hell they’re talking about AND that they are just a bunch of putzes warming chairs at desks.