On Being Governed By Scientific Frauds

[Geee]

American Thinker:

The news leaked out a while ago that Al Gore scored a D in natural science at Harvard. That would be the science introduction for Other Majors, not difficult chemistry or calculus. So Nobel Laureate Al Gore got a D in Science for Dummies.

But don't worry. Anybody can blow a college course and still bounce back. A lot of us get it wrong the first time. Unfortunately, Al Gore didn't fix his failure. He made it much worse by peddling monstrous pseudo-science and getting even richer from it. As well as repulsively fat -- a walking metaphor for his politics.

The more I think about it, the more it looks like global warming is a deliberate attack by the postmodern (anti-science) left on science. Global Frauding attacks all the core scientific values -- of truth-telling, empirical discipline, and skepticism. Our bulging Goracle gets a lifetime grade of F for setting real science back by decades.

My guess is that during the Clinton years, Al Gore planted his ideological allies in NASA and NOAA. It could have been done through his campaign to Make Government More Efficient. After all, he was saving the planet. Gore deserved his Nobel Prize just as much as Obama did for winning while black.

Phony science has a long and terrifying history on the left. Barack Obama was also officially credited by his Harvard Law professor Larry Tribe for inventing the Einstein Theory of the U.S. Constitution. Really. You can look it up. This is so bizarre it isn't even funny.

Nothing is as toxic as a really bad idea. Hundreds of millions of dollars are still being spent in "scientific" pursuit of disaster scenarios about the earth, fiddling with infinitely variable computer models. This isn't science; the burden of proof has flipped to the skeptics, which does not happen in real science. Albert Einstein had to predict observable outcomes before his ideas were accepted. Watson and Crick had to prove the helical structure of DNA before anybody took them seriously. But in Global Frauding it's the skeptics who are supposed to prove that the latest computer model is not true. If they manage that, the crooks just make up a new computer model. It's a sort of card sharper trick. A con artist can always move faster than the suckers.

No real scientist makes a deal with Al Gore and the New York Times to get rich by peddling end-of-the-world stories. No scientist is then allowed to call those planted lies "scientific truths" until somebody can prove they're wrong. If science worked like that, Galileo would still be a pariah and the Vatican would be telling us about Ptolemaic astronomy. In real science the burden of proof is on the proposer. There are good reasons for that standard.

Three decades ago, MIT Professor Edward Lorenz became famous for his discovery of "chaotic dynamics" in weather data. Scientific theorists are still building on that breakthrough. Complex systems like the earth's atmosphere have inherent unpredictability. They are not like Newton's theory of the solar system, which allows for precise predictions. The solar system is simple because everything rotates around the biggest center of gravity, the sun. Strip out the sun, and all the planets would dance around each other like a chaotic system.

As aeronautics engineer Burt Rutan has pointed out, so-called "climate modeling" is a computer game with too many unknowns. Real scientists keep discovering unexpected climate factors; but if you don't even know your biggest variables, how can you build a model at all? It's playing Hamlet without the Prince of Denmark.