June 21, 2021

June 21, 2021

Your Source for Free Speech,
Talk Radio, Podcasts, and News.

On Earth Day, Biden Must be Told: Consensus and Truth Do Not Apply to Science

by | Apr 22, 2021 |

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

In President Joe Biden’s Leaders Summit on Climate on April 22 and 23, politicians from around the world will tell us that climate scientists agree: it is unequivocal that we face a man-made climate crisis. Not only is that statement wrong, but it is also irrelevant and, ultimately, not even possible.

First, the surveys that are used to support the idea that there is a 97% consensus among experts about dangerous man-made climate change either asked the wrong people or asked the wrong question (or both – see here): 

  • The only scientists who should be polled are those who study the causes of climate change. While a bark beetle expert, for example, may well understand climate change impacts on the insects she studies, she has no special knowledge of the causes of those changes. 
  • The right question is simply, is human-caused climate change so severe that it is worth spending vast sums restructuring our entire society to try to mitigate it?

There is no known meaningful poll that fulfills both of these requirements.

And, even if there were, it would prove nothing about nature. A consensus is a tool of politics, not science, so it should not surprise us that politicians use it as a weapon to bludgeon the public into subservience. A show of hands does not decide the validity of scientific hypotheses. When Albert Einstein developed his Theory of Relativity, German scientists compiled a book titled Hundert Autoren gegen Einstein (A Hundred Authors Against Einstein), published in 1931. “Why 100?” Einstein replied. “If I were wrong, one would have been enough.”

A true advocate of real science untarnished by the politics that tends to guide it today was the award-winning American author and filmmaker Dr. Michael Crichton. Having sold over 200 million books worldwide, it is a shame that his condemnation of consensus science in general, and the warped science of global warming in particular, is not more influential today. 

In Crichton’s January 17, 2003 lecture, “Aliens Cause Global Warming,” presented at California Institute of Technology, he explained that there was an emerging crisis between science and politics that distorted the science he grew up with. That science extended life spans fed the hungry, cured diseases, and shrunk the world with jet planes and cell phones. He had expected “science to banish the evils of human thought, prejudice, and superstition.” In this lecture, he made a case for how science has been “seduced by the more ancient lures of politics and publicity.”

Crichton focused on the many ways science wasted its resources investigating things with no physical data to support it. He explained that the Search for Extra-Terrestrial Intelligence, for example, had become a sort of strange religion based on faith, not science, and its acceptance as a legitimate research area by many scientists opened a crack in the door, loosening the definition of what constituted legitimate scientific procedure. This led, Crichton said, to the false fear-mongering promoted in government reports about the so-called ‘nuclear winter’ that could result from a nuclear war. As the destruction of all agriculture was considered a given, it was pointed out that, while scientists thought nothing would grow at Hiroshima and Nagasaki for 75 years after the 1945 Atomic Bomb explosions, a large melon crop grew the next year. Nuclear winter-promoter, Stanford University biologist Dr. Paul Ehrlich, brushed the question aside, saying, “what we are doing here, however, is presenting a consensus of an extensive group of scientists.”

It was here in Crichton’s lecture that he made a statement that everyone in the world today should read and learn:

“I regard consensus science as an extremely pernicious development that ought to be stopped cold in its tracks. Historically, the claim of consensus has been the first refuge of scoundrels; it is a way to avoid debate by claiming that the matter is already settled.

“The work of science has nothing whatever to do with consensus. Consensus is the business of politics. Science, on the contrary, requires only one investigator who happens to be right, which means that he or she has the results that are verifiable by reference to the real world. In science, a consensus is irrelevant. In fact, the greatest scientists in history are great precisely because they broke with the consensus.”

Consensus may occasionally have a place in science, but only in situations different from what has happened in climate science. Consensus is typically achieved over an extended period of time by independent scientists following the conventions of the Scientific Method, in particular, welcoming and properly investigating competing hypothesis; it is not handed down by an authoritative international organization tasked with defending a single paradigm, as has been the case with the United Nation’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

All of this brings us to the second problem with the statements we will hear at Biden’s Earth Day summit: the idea that the science backing the climate scare is ‘unequivocal,’ in other words, statements that cannot be wrong. Or, as Al Gore often asserts, “truth.” But scientific hypotheses, and even scientific theories, are not absolute truth; they can be, and often are, wrong. Science ‘facts’ are merely the current opinions of experts, and, especially in the case of climate change, different experts often have very different points of view.

The UN has led the way in this mistake, often labeling its science conclusions “unequivocal.” For example, the IPCC Fourth Assessment Report Synthesis Report, one of the agency’s most important climate change documents, started, 

“Warming of the climate system is unequivocal, as is now evident from observations of increases in global average air and ocean temperatures, widespread melting of snow and ice and rising global average sea level.” 

It is obviously a mistake to refer to “global average air and ocean temperatures…and global average sea level” as “observations”—they are the results of computations based on thousands of observations in different places and at different times. But, as two philosophers on opposite sides of the global warming debate explain, the UN statement also makes no sense more importantly: 

  • Although he supports the dangerous human-caused global warming hypothesis, Lehigh University philosophy professor Dr. Steven Goldman explained in a personal communication that the IPCC statement is flawed. It is “an attempt to persuade extra-logically,” said Goldman. “Strictly logically, no observations can lead to an ‘unequivocal’ interpretation.” Goldman’s outstanding course, “Science Wars: What Scientists Know and How They Know It,” explains this idea in detail (listen here on Audible). 
  • David Wojick, a Virginia-based Ph.D. in the logic and philosophy of science, disagrees with Goldman about the climatic impact of human activity but agrees that the IPCC made a serious mistake in the Synthesis Report. “Reasoning from evidence is inductive logic,” said Wojick. “As for unequivocal, that is never the case in inductive logic.”

Yet, in speaking about the IPCC Fifth Assessment Report, Working Group I co-chair Dr. Thomas Stocker effectively gave the same message again. “Warming in the climate system is unequivocal,” said Stocker. Canadian historical climatologist Dr. Tim Ball called Stocker’s statement “nonsense.”

And, indeed, it is. Einstein said,

“Whoever undertakes to set himself up as a judge of truth and knowledge is shipwrecked by the laughter of the gods.” 

It might be humorous to the gods, but the belief that we know the ‘truth’ about global warming has resulted in over one billion US dollars a day being wasted on futile attempts to ‘stop climate change.’ Imagine what could be done with such a sum dedicated to education, health care, cleaning up our rivers, or adapting to the inevitable natural environmental changes that lie ahead.

Crichton made an important point in his Cal Tech speech because, as the 20th century drew to a close, the connection between real science and public policy became increasingly elastic. The rise of specialized advocacy groups was now effective at shaping policy without scientific data. Contributing to this has been complacency in the scientific profession and the public’s lack of good science education. This problem has been magnified, Crichton explained, by the decline of the media as independent assessors of facts. 

On Earth Day, Biden must be held to account for basing his multi-trillion-dollar climate policies, not on science, but merely on pleasing the dictates of political correctness.

Avatar

Dr. Jay Lehr is a Senior Policy Analyst with the International Climate Science Coalition and former Science Director of The Heartland Institute. He is an internationally renowned scientist, author, and speaker who has testified before Congress on dozens of occasions on environmental issues and consulted with nearly every agency of the national government and many foreign countries. After graduating from Princeton University at the age of 20 with a degree in Geological Engineering, he received the nation’s first Ph.D. in Groundwater Hydrology from the University of Arizona. He later became executive director of the National Association of Groundwater Scientists and Engineers.

Tom Harris is Executive Director of the Ottawa, Canada-based International Climate Science Coalition, and a policy advisor to The Heartland Institute. He has 40 years experience as a mechanical engineer/project manager, science and technology communications professional, technical trainer, and S&T advisor to a former Opposition Senior Environment Critic in Canada’s Parliament.

Subscribe
Notify of
guest
0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Use the code ‘OUTLOUD’ and receive your 20% discount on your first order.

The Reason the Patriot Act No Longer Works

The Reason the Patriot Act No Longer Works

We must realize the power of arrest now basically lies in Marxist hands, and they will use it. Already they have perverted the definition of who is and who is not a “terrorist.” It’s no longer the foreign Islamic Jihadists who killed over 3000 Americans in a single day, who are the terrorist!” To suggest is to be labeled Islamaphobic, but Oath Keepers, former American soldiers, and policemen still willing to keep the oaths they took to Protect and Defend the…

To Secede, or Not To Secede, That is the Question for Oregon and Idaho

To Secede, or Not To Secede, That is the Question for Oregon and Idaho

The Oregon vote shows both the desire of the people to change and their willingness to fight for their land. Is that enough? As of the writing, I don’t know how the legislature of Oregon will respond to this vote. Are the legislators willing to trap people in an unhappy situation to further their political goals? We’ve seen that before in world history, and it doesn’t end well.

John Kerry is a Consequential Internal Security Threat to America

John Kerry is a Consequential Internal Security Threat to America

John Kerry co-chaired the 2020 presidential campaign Biden-Sanders unity climate change task force with the socialist Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., which provided the framework for a “Green New Deal,” since repackaged as the Democrat “infrastructure” plan. Kerry has a habit of being in the center of many of the worst policies that pose major security risks for America…

Biden, G7 & the China Conundrum

Biden, G7 & the China Conundrum

The only way to confront the Chinese colossus is by combining the populations, economic and military powers of the USA, Europe, Russia, and India. Excluding Biden’s mental lapses and gaffes, the G7 leaders had a good time amongst themselves at enormous taxpayers’ expenses and returned home, not only empty-handed but empty-minded for completely ignoring all the following items…

5 Tools That Will Help You Tame Anxiety

5 Tools That Will Help You Tame Anxiety

Emotions are actually intelligent indicators meant to get your attention and provide energy and information. Anxiety as an emotional symptom is a sign you are not present. Ultimately, you can retrain your mind with consistent self-care tools and by prioritizing yourself to take the time to reset when your emotions are getting overly amped up…

COVID-19 Vaccines Not Safe for Human Use on Either Side of the Atlantic

COVID-19 Vaccines Not Safe for Human Use on Either Side of the Atlantic

Since the majority of the deaths occur within a few days of the vaccine administration, if the vaccine did not directly “cause” the death, it was undoubtedly in the causal pathway of these temporally related fatalities. Common narratives include vaccine-induced fatal heart attacks, strokes, blood clots, and blood disorders. 5,888 Americans have died and confirmed by the CDC, and possibly tens of thousands not reported or still backlogged at the CDC…

Sadly, Biden Was the Laugh of the G7 Party

Sadly, Biden Was the Laugh of the G7 Party

The President’s behavior throughout the G7 meeting and the meeting with Putin that followed did nothing to alleviate the suspicions that many Americans have that the President’s cognitive ability is fading rapidly. This, of course, leads to another question: Is Joe Biden really able to carry out his duties as President of the United States and leader of the free world?

#BidenBlunders Are Top Greatest US Threats – Not White Supremacists or Global Warming

#BidenBlunders Are Top Greatest US Threats – Not White Supremacists or Global Warming

How does terminating American petroleum and pipelines — while at the same time placating Putin’s — benefit all those drowning Arctic polar bears Al Gore warned us about? I’m betting that lots of recently unemployed coal miners and oil patch roughnecks are among a great many who are questioning these same contradictions regarding America’s truly urgent problems…

Coincidence or Conspiracy to Take Down a Nation

Coincidence or Conspiracy to Take Down a Nation

Now with a clearer vision of the past year and a half, could this nightmare we’ve been living have all been simply happenstance? Or is there something more sinister behind it? When we consider some parallels between the CCP-virus, the now-obvious hanky-panky that surrounded our Nov. 3rd elections, and the false flags unfolding around the January 6th Capitol event, we could almost have a conspiracy!

Your Source for Free Speech, Talk Radio, Podcasts, and News.

 

Here we take on the challenges of our generation so that we can preserve future generations.

iHeartRadio

The APPS are free; the mission is priceless!

Free APP

Podcast Networks

Apple Podcasts
Google Podcasts
Spotify
Pandora
Tunein
iHeart
Stitcher

Subscribe and Listen on Your Favorite APP

Our Columnists and Show Hosts

Support wounded and fallen police officers. The Wounded Blue.

Apple Podcasts

Fighting corporate censorship and ensuring voter integrity...

Apple Podcasts
Share via
Copy link
Powered by Social Snap