Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Donald Kennedy and the corruption of Science Magazine
American Thinker ^ | December 07, 2009 | By James Lewis

Posted on 12/06/2009 11:46:30 PM PST by neverdem

Science magazine has been stewing so long in the Global Warming bouillabaisse that its very brains are begin to smoke. That may be because its august Editor-in-Chief Donald Kennedy (until last year) was a dedicated Warm-monger. Science is the flagship journal of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the political lobby for Big Science in Washington, D.C. The Editor-in-Chief of Science is like the Queen of England: It's the closest thing to God in the church hierarchy.  Everybody kisses your butt and all you have to do is wave your hand to the cheering peasantry from your golden coach.

Try a Google search for "Donald Kennedy AND Global Warming" and you get almost six million hits. Search for "global warming" in Science magazine itself, and you get 2,792 citations -- almost as many as you get for "increased science funding."

Here are some Science magazine headlines in the last several years, a period when we know that atmospheric temperatures were flat or declining. As MIT Professor of Meteorology Richard S. Lindzen just wrote in the Wall Street Journal: "Claims that climate change is accelerating are bizarre."    The unfortunate tendency of the atmosphere to stop warming is of course why Phil Jones and the CRUdocrats were trying to "fix" the data in their infamous email exchanges.

During this time Science magazine published thousands of references to Global Warming, including headlines like:

CLIMATE CHANGE: Taming the Angry Beast

Ken Caldeira

Science 17 October 2008 322: 376-377 (in Books) ....What Past Climate Changes Reveal About the Current Threat--and How... (human) activities have triggered the possibility of catastrophic climate change, how we have come to recognize the threat......


CLIMATE CHANGE: IPCC Report Lays Out Options for Taming Greenhouse Gases

John Bohannon

Science 11 May 2007 316: 812-814


CLIMATE CHANGE: Global Warming Is Changing the World

Richard A. Kerr

Science 13 April 2007 316: 188-190


How Much More Global Warming and Sea Level Rise?

Gerald A. Meehl, Warren M. Washington, William D. Collins, Julie M. Arblaster, Aixue Hu, Lawrence E. Buja, Warren G. Strand, and Haiyan Teng

Science 18 March 2005 307: 1769-1772


Global Warming and the Next Ice Age

Andrew J. Weaver and Claude Hillaire-Marcel

Science 16 April 2004 304: 400-402

Et cetaera ad nauseam. It's not a pretty sight.

Things get only worse when we look at the Eurekalert site, which is also run by the AAAS. Eurekalert presents an endless flow of press releases from universities that make billions from Federal grants. This is where our pop media  get their scientific  news. 

Here are some search results:

Global Warming: 2,500 hits

Climate Change: 5,140 hits

CO2 Global Warming: 2,498 hits

Anthropogenic: 338 hits

Catastrophic: 1,213 hits

Apparently a lot of PR guys and gals were mining this little vein of gold. Remember Goebbels' slogan that "A Big Lie repeated often enough becomes the truth"? This is the Big Lie Repetition Machine. All your average journalist has to do is go to Eurekalert, search for "catastrophic" or "global warming" and copy the latest headline. Since the media are firing human ‘journalists' these days, they might as well get a computer program to do it.

It was Donald Kennedy who initiated the Science magazine State of the Planet issues, to drive home the Global Warming meme. In an editorial in the 6 January 2006 issue of Science he wrote, "The consequences of the past century's temperature increase are becoming dramatically apparent in the increased frequency of extreme weather events ..."

Only trouble: It wasn't true.

As skeptic Roger Pielke, Jr. wrote in a letter to Science that somehow passed the censors:

"Over recent decades, the IPCC found no long-term global trends in extratropical cyclones (i.e., winter storms), in "droughts or wet spells," or in"tornados, hail, and other severe weather"... A recent study by the International Ad Hoc Detection and Attribution Group concluded that it was unable to detect an anthropogenic signal in global precipitation." (Science, June 9, 2005, Letters)

But Mr. Kennedy's mind was made up, and mere facts could not change it. In his Editorial on The Breakthrough of the Year for 2005, Kennedy wrote:

"An especially significant runner-up (to the Breakthrough of the Year for 2005) was climate change. 650,000-year-old ice cores from Antarctica give a continuous record of correlations between atmospheric carbon dioxide and methane and the temperature changes imposed by glacial cycles. New information put to rest the idea, popular with those skeptical about global warming, that satellite measurements, in contrast to ground measurements, showed cooling. One by one, holes in the global warming case are being filled. Government actions should follow; of that, I'll say more in the first Science issue of the new year." (http://www.sciencemag.org/  SCIENCE VOL 310 23 DECEMBER 2005 )

So -- guess who was instrumental in getting Donald Kennedy appointed to that plum job at Science mag? Yes, it was our old friend Paul Ehrlich, the author of The Population Bomb of 1968 --- the one that sputtered frighteningly for decades but never went off. It was Paul Ehrlich who wrote the major puff piece for Donald Kennedy, introducing him as Editor-in-Chief of Science mag, the most powerful job in American science. 562

22 JULY2005 VOL 309 SCIENCE http://www.sciencemag.org/  


Are you beginning to suspect a set-up? Unh-huh...

I know a liberal who fell for Paul Ehrlich's book The Population Bomb three decades ago and still believes it today. Liberals never have to change their minds, especially about facts. Certainly Ehrlich never changed his mind, and when his predictions about Planetary Doom failed, he didn't come to the obvious conclusion that I must have been wrong. He just added more epicycles to his pleasingly complicated picture of the climate. That little sentence "I must be wrong" is the most important one in the entire vocabulary of honest scientists, of whom there are still a few lonely souls wandering over the blasted heath of Big Academia.

It seems that Ehrlich and Kennedy are good buds. Neither of them are scientists -- but they do play them on TV, in the media and at Stanford.

Donald Kennedy was Commissioner of the FDA for Jimmy Carter in the Seventies and hasn't stepped into a lab since that time, as far as I can tell from his publications -- none are based on empirical evidence. All he writes are editorials.  Instead, Professor Kennedy returned to being head of Biology at Stanford University.

If you look up Kennedy's bio on Wikipedia you'll see it's been airbrushed in Stalinist fashion -- it's only a few short paragraphs, with a big notice that Wikipedia does not allow disputed material to appear about living persons. That suggests that somebody wanted to cite some critical facts but Professor Kennedy objected. I wonder why? 

One likely reason is the infamous Stanford University Overhead Scandal. "Overhead" is what universities charge the government over and above the cost of supporting research: In the evil corporate world it's called "profit margin." Of course universities would never think about making profits, which is why their tuitions and overhead charges to the Feds have been going up and up and up. Barred from making profits, all they do is raise their salaries and pensions and pad their expense accounts. They're in bed with a monopoly -- the Federal science bureaucracy -- so they charge monopoly prices.

Well, Donald Kennedy as President of Stanford was caught dipping a little too deeply into the honey pot. Some business about $7,000.000 bed sheets for the presidential residence and overbilling the Office of Naval Research 200 million dollars.  Small stuff. But the US Congress took notice, and called Donald Kennedy on the carpet. Mr. Kennedy defended every penny of his charges and resigned. That's when his good friends, like Mr. Ehrlich, got him his job at Science mag.

Everything about Science now smells fishy. The scientific blog world should be searching through journal websites to see how deeply they are quagmired in the honey pot of Global Warming: Nature, Scientific American, The Lancet, National Geographic, the lot. They all have websites with search engines. Public exposure may help them to clean out that pervasive stink of rotten fish.

Because the decay goes far beyond the CRUddites in Britain; it's all over the world among the machine politicians of science. All of them knew what was going on with the Biggest Science Scam in History, because it should be obvious to a child of six. Undergraduates in calculus classes learn that nonlinear dynamical systems are unanalyzable. Introductory physics classes learn there is no solution to the three-body problem, and the atmosphere is a lot more complicated than just three asteroids cycling around each other in space. Metereologist Edward Lorenz rose to fame in science by dramatizing the nature of chaotical systems, physical systems that cannot be predicted from their initial conditions. The weather is one of the best examples, but the earth sciences and biology are full of them.   So no sane scientist or mathematician could have believed the Global Warming scam. If any of them say they believe it today, they are either lying or incompetent.

Global Warming is like Political Correctness; everybody knows it's a lie, but nobody is allowed to say it in public.

This is a sad time for decent science.

But on the other hand, it's Springtime for Fraudocrats.


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Editorial; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: corruption; donaldkennedy; science; sciencemagazine
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-24 next last
I can't stand corruption. I look at the corruption of science like treason.
1 posted on 12/06/2009 11:46:33 PM PST by neverdem
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

Comment #2 Removed by Moderator

To: neverdem

As a typical jackbooted, nature worshipping, green religious, socialist evo-journal...they deserve whatever’s coming to them...shut them down!


3 posted on 12/07/2009 12:11:34 AM PST by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
I can't stand corruption. I look at the corruption of science like treason.

Yup, been fighting that fight full time for twelve long years.

4 posted on 12/07/2009 12:14:42 AM PST by Carry_Okie (The environment is too complex and too important to manage by central planning.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
HERE is the best synopsis of the Climategate scandal that I have read (and I have read most of them), especially with regard to the fraudulent "science" of it all.

"What you do, if you are a serious scientist operating according to the established method, is attempt to falsify your hypothesis. Test it to destruction; carry out serious attacks on its weakest points to see if they hold up. If they do... then you have a theory that can be published, and tested, and verified by other scientists. If you don't, you throw it out.

The "scientists" who perpetrated the "global warming" fraud approached their "science" in exactly the opposite manner as the approach described above. They formulated a theory and then did whatever they had to do with their data to "prove" it.

5 posted on 12/07/2009 12:26:34 AM PST by Lancey Howard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

To have treason, there has to be an entity to be treasonous against. When the whole world seems to be made of warring factions and there is nobody acknowledged to desire the good of mankind as a whole, this is what honor breaks down to. Frankly, I am shocked. I thought that most scientists were higher minded than this. But when they discover that everybody coming down on one side of a debate makes them richer (at least lawyers as a whole don’t have this temptation) then the whole thing goes to pot.


6 posted on 12/07/2009 12:32:15 AM PST by HiTech RedNeck (I am in America but not of America.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem; DollyCali; According2RecentPollsAirIsGood; Thunder90; Little Bill; Nervous Tick; ...
 




Beam me to Planet Gore !

7 posted on 12/07/2009 2:49:07 AM PST by steelyourfaith (Time to prosecute Al Gore now that fellow scam artist Bernie Madoff is in stir.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
Thanks for posting. As a member of the AAAS and a reader of Science, I have seen this bias for years and it has made me mad. Glad to see this deconstruction of these leftistist liars (redundant, I know).
8 posted on 12/07/2009 2:55:32 AM PST by Pharmboy (The Stone Age did not end because they ran out of stones...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

Liberals are all too eager to tell you how the Nixon impeachment disillusioned them and scarred them for life.

I wonder how many people will be scarred for life when they learn that all the catastrophic global warming pap they were fed through school beginning in nursery school and lasting through graduate school was deliberately wrong.

This is a sad day for science. A good day, because it can’t be fixed until the problem is addressed, and it is finally becoming visible, but a bad day, still.


9 posted on 12/07/2009 3:16:28 AM PST by rlmorel (We are traveling "The Road to Serfdom".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

“I look at the corruption of science like treason.”

It’s worse than treason; it’s a forced march into the Dark Ages.


10 posted on 12/07/2009 3:45:20 AM PST by rightwingcrazy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem; OKSooner; honolulugal; Killing Time; Beowulf; Mr. Peabody; RW_Whacko; SideoutFred; ...
Image and video hosting by TinyPic

FReepmail me to get on or off

Ping me if you find one I've missed.


Image and video hosting by TinyPic

FReepmail me to get on or off

Ping me if you find one I've missed.



11 posted on 12/07/2009 3:53:53 AM PST by xcamel (The urge to save humanity is always a false front for the urge to rule it. - H. L. Mencken)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
This is one of the most powerful things about climategate, is that it is exposing the institutional fraud that is caused by big government. People would always say, "Well, why do so many scientists believe in global warming?" My answer was, they don't but you never get to hear about or read the other guys because they are gagged by the GW establishment.

It's the same thing in textbooks. Why are all the textbooks liberal? Well, yes most of the profs who write them are libs, but even if you get a conservative textbook, the editors and copy editors and most of the publishers are libs. So it's VERY difficult to get a conservative book through the process.

12 posted on 12/07/2009 4:30:36 AM PST by LS ("Castles made of sand, fall in the sea . . . eventually." (Hendrix))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
Introductory physics classes learn there is no solution to the three-body problem,

Can any science type explain what "the three-body problem" is, precisely what the "problem" is, and what makes a solution impossible?

I'm not a science type myself and I never heard of this (no reason why I should have, I guess), so my question may well be badly phrased, and it may be a stupid question, but how will I learn if I don't ask questions? :)

13 posted on 12/07/2009 5:18:19 AM PST by maryz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: aflaak

ping


14 posted on 12/07/2009 6:15:35 AM PST by r-q-tek86 ("A building has integrity just like a man. And just as seldom." - Ayn Rand)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

I attended a climate change-themed lecture at a VERY august institution a few months ago. One of the things the presenter noted was that the topic was perfect for every constituency in academia to use as a fund raiser.


15 posted on 12/07/2009 6:27:28 AM PST by NativeNewYorker (Freepin' Jew Boy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
Really good read.

In the Comments section, there are also some excellent remarks by a poster identifying himself as "Dr. Dave."

16 posted on 12/07/2009 7:03:35 AM PST by Madame Dufarge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Madame Dufarge
This was a good one by Artman 1746:

It is clear that when government enters in, heresy follows. Our Founders understood. We now do not.

Government entered the mortgage business; look what we have in our financial meltdown!

Government wanted to "help" the black poor; it destroyed the black culture and family!

Government entered into science; look what we have in Climategate!

Government wanted to lower out-of-wedlock births through sex education; out-of-wedlock birth rate tripled!

Government entered into medicine; look what we have with fraud and waste in Medicare and Medcaid!

Government entered education; our public schools are a colossal failure!

Government entered retirement programs; social security is bankrupt

Government slid outside the boundaries of the Constitution; we got damaging political correctness, racial chaos and damaging national debt!

Government is entering Health Care; they say insanity is doing the same thing over and over expecting a different result!

17 posted on 12/07/2009 7:17:51 AM PST by sausageseller (If you want to cut your own throat, don't come to me for a bandage. M, Thatcher)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: sausageseller

I like to read science magazines and articles. Over the past 15 years or so it has gotten ridiculous how the “warmer” bias has taken over many previously seemingly unbiased “science” magazines. It is hard to remain a loyal reader when I realize how biased these “scientists” are and how warped by politics the writers are. So sad. Back to superstition and astrology, I guess. It was nice while it lasted.


18 posted on 12/07/2009 7:23:08 AM PST by hal ogen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: maryz; AFPhys
Can any science type explain what "the three-body problem" is, precisely what the "problem" is, and what makes a solution impossible?

Take the phrase, "the three-body problem", and enter it into your favorite search engine's query box. Then click go. It's important to include those quotation marks. That tells the search engine to hunt for that exact string of words. Here's an example:

Mathematical mysteries: the three body problem

AFPhys, if you have better examples, would you please be so kind as to provide them?

I'm not a science type myself and I never heard of this (no reason why I should have, I guess), so my question may well be badly phrased, and it may be a stupid question, but how will I learn if I don't ask questions? :)

In the almost anonymous age of the internet and exponentially increasing knowledge, finding a truly stupid question is getting very hard. Ignorance is not the same as stupidity.

19 posted on 12/07/2009 8:52:56 AM PST by neverdem (Xin loi minh oi)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

Thanks!


20 posted on 12/07/2009 12:01:24 PM PST by maryz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-24 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson