W.H. Science Czar: 'Global Warming' Is 'Dangerous Misnomer' (Prefers 'Global Climate Disruption')

John Holdren, our official fraudulent "Science Czar" for our equally mendacious president, has dumped "global warming" as a "dangerous misnomer." Ah, yes, that would be it, then. It's not the facts, but the words that are wrong, says America's official Doctor Science.

In scientific terms, this means John Holdren has run up the white flag and is begging for mercy. "Warming" is something we can measure scientifically. "Global warming" is a lot more speculative, but with satellites, weather balloons, and plenty of ocean buoys, we now know that it's just wrong. Global warming has been shot down in flames by scientific skeptics who resorted to an unfair tactic called "facts and observations."

The wild hypothesis of "catastrophic anthropogenic global warming a hundred years from now," is so obviously harebrained sci-fi that no sane person can believe in it.

Dr. Holdren's newest brainstorm? Forget all that warming stuff. No, we are now supposed to believe in something called "global climate disruption."

That way, some wildly overpaid, "internationally respected" climate modeler can predict that in a hundred years, things will get two degrees warmer, colder, or neither one nor the other and still predict the end of the earth. That'll be a couple of hundred million dollars for more life-saving "research," if you please.

The media are banging on "scientific" doors for another cataclysmic headline, right now, to feed their hunger for the Scare of the Day. Their whole business model depends on it. The New York Times is talking about giving up its paper edition entirely. ABC has fired its "News" chief. They desperately need another scary hobgoblin to goose the ignorant masses, or they might go belly-up tomorrow. Let's hope they do go down tomorrow, because it couldn't happen to a nicer bunch. That's why free markets have losers, and boy, are these people ever losers.

I suppose that's why Dr. Holdren thinks that old and toxic phrase "global warming" is now "dangerous." But dangerous for whom? Not dangerous for the real world, that's for sure. Not dangerous for developing countries that build another coal-fired power plant every day to feed their billions of hungry people. They can see people dying on the streets in Calcutta, but they can't see two degrees warmer in a hundred years being such a big deal. Maybe Dr. Holdren thinks that "global warming" is now "dangerous" for the corrupt politicized faux scientists who have built their careers on ecological hobgoblins? That sounds more like it.

Climate modeling is now becoming perfectly theological in spinning new and fancier epicycles to save bad old scare campaign. How many angels can dance on the head of tomorrow's eco-fraud? How many weird goblins can populate Dr. Holdren's feverish imagination? It changes from day to day.

This is how dying political establishments behave. In real science, you don't have play those save-your-butt games, because you make really sure to keep out crazy and unsupported hypotheses from the very beginning. Really bad ideas never hit quality journal headlines, because you have honest reviewers who stop the corruption before it even starts.

This isn't science. It's "JournoLismo." It's supermarket checkout tabloid Martians meeting Russian cosmonauts fantasy-mongering. It is beneath contempt for anybody who cares about real science.

After the biggest fraud in the history of science, it will take years for scientists to recover their good names -- and that's assuming they cut out the cancer fast, before it spreads. Remember that the clergy once had the credibility we give to scientists today. Credibility can be lost, and credibility should be lost when it is abused. Global warming has been the worst money-grubbing scandal in the history of science. Let's make them keep that phrase "global warming" to remind them of their billion-dollar fraud. Don't let them deep-six it into the memory hole of Stalinist history.

In science, you are supposed to put your wild brainstorms at risk of empirical falsification. Global warming has been falsified very nicely after a decade of satellite observations that support a small cooling trend. For True Believers and their legions of addicted suckers, that's only a temporary deviation from those marvelous computer models they keep fiddling with. But scientists are not supposed to be True Believers in somebody's money-making brainstorm. Leave that to the swampland real estate salesmen.

John Holdren is the guy whose stellar career started with global cooling in the '70s and who has managed to surf the wild waves of ecological hysteria for decades, making a damned good living at it.

Should we believe him now?

In your dreams, John.

Science is nothing without truth-telling and honesty, and you're no scientist.

You're a fraud, and so are your buds in the White House.

My favorite 1970's headlines:
The Next Ice Age (within a decade);
The Population Bomb (world food shortages will see a billion die and untold millions in the USA);
Alacar Pesticide To Kill Untold Thousands (never happened, but did cripple the apple industry and countless jobs);

My most favorite Time Magazine cover story of the mid-70's: "Differences Between Male and Female Children Discovered". This was during the "nature versus nurture" debate held over from the hippie culture of the late 60's. Nurture was the prevailing wisdom of the time. There were supposedly NO differences in genders, except for how they were raised (nurtured). I and my wife laughed our asses off when we finally saw the academics admit there are inherent differences in the brain chemistry of the genders (transexuals notwithstanding). As if any parent couldn't see it.

Global Warming? The seas will rise and swamp low lands. The polar bears will go extinct. The polar bear population has doubled in numbers! The north polar sea ice has increased recently, although Greenland's glaciers are decreasing due to sitting above a hot spot (which geologist now admit). Remember why that place was named Greenland? The south polar ice has almost doubled, even with parts breaking off as gravity and techtonic motion tends to do.

Here's more scientific conflicting theories: Fats are the main cause of heart attacks and should be completely eliminated.
Then they tell us certain fats like olive oil and fish oil fats are good for us.
Then we hear that "lean" red meat is not so bad after all. Who would have thought that since we are carnivorous mammals? Duh.
Then we hear that cholesterol (which is naturally produced in the liver) is going to kill us and eliminate ALL cholesterol.
Later, they discover the differences between high and low density cholesterol is the problem, rather than total cholesterol. Which I tend to believe to be true, but still the scientists didn't make such a distinction at the time.
NOW. we're told it's not so much about cholesterol but actually fats (again) that will kill us - so stop eating red meat, again. Now it's all about triglycerides (a specific type of fat) that is the culprit.

The latest scientific doom proclamation was about a month go when our "learned and wise" academics predicted that an approaching huge solar flare would disrupt world-wide communications and possibly render our satellites useless. Didn't happen either. I won't even bother with Y2K and how we would revert back to 1800's. How did that work out for all the "experts"?

Bottom line: Scientists often don't have supporting empirical evidence to further their grant-approved agendas and political leanings nor truly have the knowledge to understand the intricacies of the planet and human biology. We've learned that even when they do, they massage the numbers, again, for their own pet theories and grants.

While I'm on this rant: Einstein is now believed to be wrong about certain parts of his relativity theory. Stephan Hawkings' theories are also challenged by many modern physicists. Dark matter and multi-dimensional planes are the latest theories. Plus, now they think they have an answer to as what existed before the Big Bang. As if anyone could know what created the Universe by math equations or the doppler affect. Arrogant. And I'm not a religious person.

Unfortunately, scientists are destroying there own credibility. I find that sad.

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.