Life in a small town, Pen as Sword - Social Commentary, Politics and Economics

Broken ankles make people cranky … Global Warming and Death …

Inner Thoughts”  Rodrigo Rodriguez, from the album “Inner Thoughts” (2006)

Just a nice pleasant coffee break discussion …

I will bet this is probably way more than you feel like reading but I am going to run on anyway because I just feel like talking about things today. When I first wrote this it had been 11 days since my ankle surgery. It’s now been 30 days and things are looking much better … no more pain and stretching things out now.

Back in February I rated my constant pain level at about 4 out of 10 where 0 is no pain at all and 10 is all consuming pain such that you can’t think about anything else. Now I am mostly just “uncomfortable” and I am starting to exercise to get some flexibility and strength back into the joint.

“Your mileage may vary” as they used to say.  “Danger Will Robinson!”, Engage!

What’s on my mind this morning is a mixture of irritation about the irrationality of the Global Warming crowd, and a Lenten awareness of personal mortality and our ultimate destination namely death, which destination rarely surfaces as a relevant topic amongst the chattering classes with their overwhelming concern with “fixing” the behaviour of everyone who disagrees with them by any means possible.

If you are still reading this, it is likely that you and I live in the real world and always have. So do the rest of those who I call friends, some of them for almost 50 years now, although many have also died and gone to their reward. Unfortunately that classification of “friend” excludes most of my family on both sides, both genetic and in-laws who have “drunk the KoolAide” and signed their names in blood to agree with what passes for “common sense” on Social Media these days. I still try to protect them or save them from the predictable results of their ill-considered decisions, and they are a GOD given invitation to practice good works with good will, with love instead of contempt.

I have to just hold my nose and play the nodding donkey whenever they try to tell me insane “truths” like the “Polar Vortex” is caused by Global Warming caused by Alberta’s coal fired electrical generation stations … of which we have 5 out of 24 in Canada and over 7000 worldwide, and we have to shut them all down to “save the planet”. Sigh. They all live in Ontario, which they apparently believe doesn’t use any carbon based energy from Alberta, though they have a few coal fired plants of their own but we won’t talk about that, eh?

Sigh. One cannot develop humility without going through humiliation. I have it on good Authority that that’s how you do it, so thank-you for the humiliation.

Carl Sagan, … Cosmos … Trust me, I’m smarter than you …

Idiocy and deviance in all it’s flavors seems to be thriving in the nice tolerant Canada we now live in. I got a short note about coal fired power the other day from a friend who is concerned about the thousands of layoffs we have had here in Alberta, in the last couple of years.

It is even now starting to reach deep down to the service companies, who are always the last to go tits up. I am going to include it here as food for thought but not as food for anger, because we have been through this all before.

I remember when all the usual suspects were assuring us that we were entering a new ice age and we were all going to die from starvation  within 20 years … that was back in the 70’s.

I fondly remember Carl Sagan, and his Nuclear Winter and Cosmos, and not so fondly raise a questioning eyebrow at Paul R. Ehrlich et al. and millions dying of starvation in the U.S. by the 1990’s.

The Wikipedia Brights mostly agree with and worship Sagan and Ehrlich but they do have fairly comprehensive articles about their beliefs and their work so I cited them anyway. You can look at all that stuff and decide for yourselves whether population control lights your fires or not. The Chinese Communists imposed strict population control which has worked out rather problematically – again, the law of unintended consequences in action.

When that whole death by massive apocalyptic starvation didn’t pan out as a a good scare tactic they all switched over to Ehrlich’s other “big scary problem” beating the drum about global warming and pollution and the man made causes of that. Don’t believe me?  I remember this, ’cause I was there! If you weren’t then here are some “Historic Notes“:

The Population Bomb is/was a best-selling book written by Stanford University Professor of Biology and teacher, Paul R. Ehrlich and his wife, Anne Ehrlich (who was uncredited), in 1968.

It warned of the mass starvation of humans in the 1970s and 1980s due to overpopulation, as well as other major societal upheavals, and advocated immediate action to limit population growth (why do they always decide that they have to kill off someone else to solve the problem?). Remember that fears of a “population explosion” were widespread in the 1950s and 60s, but the book and its author brought the idea to an even wider audience.

The book has been criticized since its publishing for its alarmist tone, and in recent decades for its inaccurate predictions. More importantly, and tragically, the book gave a huge number of unqualified, untrained, ignorant, emotional, “feelings matter” coffee klatch pundits a sincere belief in the notion that they were a special enlightened Illuminati with authority to enforce their opinions on others by social media shaming and virtue signalling or by voting for every lunatic who promised to “save the planet” by shutting down the entire evil carbon based portion of our economy (as if somehow the rest of the economy could exist in isolation for longer than a few weeks). Yes Virginia, the sky IS falling, but it takes billions of years.

“Àki”, Rodrigo Rodriguez, from the album “Inner Thoughts” (2006)

I intentionally use the term coffee klatch. or coffee klatsch also kaf·fee·klatsch (kŏf′ē-klăch′, -kläch′, kô′fē-) that is a casual social gathering for coffee and conversation. [Partial translation of German Kaffeeklatsch : Kaffee, coffee + Klatsch, gossip; see klatch.] Up until recently no adult would make the mistake of considering any coffee klatch equivalent to serious scientific and mathematical research by knowledgeable people under controlled conditions, but that is what is now driving the show thanks to the mob stirred up in the 70’s and 80’s, by Sagan, Erlich, and their contemporaries.

Now Sagan is dead, gone to his just reward, and the Ehrlichs continue stand by the basic ideas in the book, stating in 2009 that “perhaps the most serious flaw in “The Bomb” was that it was much too optimistic about the future” and believe that it achieved their goals because “it alerted people to the importance of environmental issues and brought human numbers into the debate on the human future.”

Right! It was all them, because regular folks are just too stupid to avoid running over the cliff without the intervention of the Brights. And it’s all “for our own good” that we now kill several hundred thousand children and seniors and handicapped people per year because they are not really people, we all know it’s really all just about “free choice” and we have too many of “them” anyway.

Dr. Paul R. Ehrlich, entomologist, 1974

Fact: Erlich trained as an Entomologist (specializing in butterflies). He had no background or training in agronomy or population growth.

“The Population Bomb” was written at the suggestion of David Brower the executive director of the environmentalist Sierra Club, and Ian Ballantine of Ballantine Books following various public appearances Ehrlich had made regarding population issues and their relation to the environment.

The Population Bomb began with the statement:  “The battle to feed all of humanity is over. In the 1970s hundreds of millions of people will starve to death in spite of any crash programs embarked upon now. At this late date nothing can prevent a substantial increase in the world death rate … ”

Nothing weaselly about that prediction. Pretty much lays it on the line. And was dead wrong.  … but the book was a huge marketing success and made a LOT of money for the players involved.  Any questions?

or another:

Global cooling will kill us all!!!  But they didn’t just have a proposed physical mechanism for this catastrophe. They had the evidence of the temperature record, which showed global temperatures generally declining from about 1940 to 1970. 30 years of data = “certainty about what is going on with earth ecology and climate?”

Which ecology and climate have been “evolving” for … Oh … something like 4.543 billion years. Even Wikipedia tells us that: “Earth is the third planet from the Sun and the only astronomical object known to harbor life. According to radiometric dating and other sources of evidence, Earth formed over 4.5 billion years ago. Earth’s gravity interacts with other objects in space, especially the Sun and the Moon, Earth’s only natural satellite.”

So they looked at 6.60356593e-9% of the data, or examined another way they looked at 0.000000000660356593% of the data and decided that that was enough for a slope graph, after all they already knew what was going on, right? (“Hokey” Stick anyone?) And that minute amount of data led to fevered “scientific” predictions like this one, from UC Davis ecology professor Kenneth Watt:

The world has been chilling sharply for about twenty years. If present trends continue, the world will be about four degrees colder for the global mean temperature in 1990, but eleven degrees colder in the year 2000. This is about twice what it would take to put us into an ice age.

My guess is that Professor Kenneth Watt didn’t major in Mathematics. And I am sure that no university professor in history would have graded any student with a pass if that student only came up with 6.60356593e-9% of the data, even if they were “grading on the curve”.

Carl Sagan & Viking Lander Model

As late as 1980, Carl Sagan was still presenting global cooling as one of two possible doomsday scenarios we could choose from. The series “Cosmos marks the precise moment of change, when the goal posts were moved. In essence they “flipped the “Hokey Stick Graph” from cold to hot. And yes I do know how to spell Hockey, I’m Canajun, eh?

This is a bit of a cultural time capsule, preserving the precise moment at which scientific alarmists were switching from warning about a new ice age, in the 1970s, to warning about runaway warming in the 90’s.. So, “soft science”, moving goal posts, changing stories, relativism, denial, plausible deniability

It still all boils down to “The sky is falling!!!! Therefore we have to be compelled to give up all control to the “enlightened ones” and do what we are told like good little sheeple because they know best“. They are just so much smarter than us. And as we know, that “solution” always involves some flavor of “there are too many of them and not enough of us” therefore we are compelled to “kill the inconvenient ones”.

Of course Papa Pierre was also a big fanboy of Alfred Charles Kinsey, and we all know where that led us to … NAMBLA et al are founded on the gospel according to Kinsey. In Canada, any opposition to that philosophy is now labeled as a “Hate Crime”.

Do you think that eugenics, abortion and euthanasia are something new we just cooked up? They have all been around for thousands of years … and history shows that every culture which starts killing its children as a part of social policy ultimately fails … always have and always will. World without end, Amen.

So, in Canada, they destroyed the economy in the 80’s in the great 20th century hydrocarbon panic. How, you might ask? Because Papa Doc Pierre, who took a few courses at the London School of Economics in the 60’s knew best, even if he never hung around in England long enough to pick up a degree or even a certificate.

He Nationalized” the oil industry by buying Gulf Oil and turning it into Petrocan and setting up the NEP to drive away all the other oil companies. The big crash of 82 was when we went to the Arctic for 15 years because there was absolutely no work to be had in the south.

Anyway, here’s a bit of the power plant rant and that post has the rest of the dirt for coffee break conversation, and please please all of you take care of yourselves and be careful on the ice.

Here’s just a small sample of how many coal plants there are out there:

EU has 468 plants building 27 more for a total of 495
TURKEY has 56 plants building 93 more total 149
SOUTH AFRICA has 79 building 24 more total 103
INDIA has 589 building 446 more total 1036
PHILIPPINES has 19 building 60 more total 79
SOUTH KOREA has 58 building 26 more total 84
JAPAN has 90 building 45 more total 135
USA has 589 building 5 more total 594
CHINA has 2363, building 1171 total 3534
CANADA has 24 total and none planned.

But here comes the NDP to save the planet shutting down our Alberta’s 5 plants and the entire energy sector while they are at it. 5 out of a total of 7208 world coal generation plants is 0.0007 %.

But  there is hope, there could be an alternate future, if only we believe … As I mentioned above, I posted about this on my blog here.  I realize that I place a lot of emphasis on the web of trust. That is, who do you trust and who do you rely on to get the truth and understanding from which all thought, and decision making and choices ultimately derive.

The truth, that is, “what actually happened” as opposed to what all the Environmental Nazis said was going to happen, is that they were and are actually massively wrong about almost everything they were and are screaming about.

There is a good read here about the Environazis’ epic fail which non of the MSM ever report on. I have written several posts on the Web of Trust back in 2015, Part 1 here, Part 2 here, Part 3 here, and Part 4 here.

So what about death, or should I say “Death“?  What about that final destination to which every single living human being is committed, whether by natural causes, or by some apocalyptic Global Warming holocaust, regardless of their beliefs or lack of same about anything?

I decided that I have rambled on long enough this time and I will put off death to another post … Ha, I wish it was that easy …

Cheers

Joe

 

 

Standard
Pen as Sword - Social Commentary

Web of Trust … part 4

(Note to readers who might find this old post from May 2015:  That was then, this is now, I am adding this on April 14, 2019, almost 4 years on from where I was back in May 2015. I have to emphatically declare that much of what I believe and write about in this and the next three post about “The Web Of Trust” is based on the work of Bill Whittle and his writings at the beginning of the 21st century, about that Web of Trust as he sees it and also to no small degree on his “Tribes” polemic. 

Bill put it all together in a good book called “SILENT AMERICA: ESSAYS FROM A DEMOCRACY AT WAR” which is well worth reading. Bill articulated very well the headspace of an entire generation of retired vets, workers in the trenches of our modern society, and even many who served in other ways, his Grey Tribe workers … you know who you are.

And he affected the way we resolved the coginitive dissonance we experienced once we left the Armed Services. I had a rather gentle transition spending, as I did, 10 years in the Corrections Service, getting used to “civvie street” again before making a clean break into the world of modern College, University and eventually Government Health Care. Others were not so lucky.)

Restating, that list of 7 hard disciplines is the complete picture of our civilization’s web of trust in a nutshell – physics, astronomy, chemistry, biology, engineering, computer science and of course mathematics.

Everything that makes life safe, prosperous, and even possible for us today depends totally on developments and progress building step upon step in those 7 hard disciplines, the development of which stretches all the way back to Aristotle, Plato, and the birth of the Western Philosophical Tradition.

And, of course, the total construct of these interrelated  “hard science” disciplines rests on a foundation of Catholic philosophy and the work of hundreds of generations of Catholic scientists. We are never told about that part these days.

tomcruise

Tom Cruise, Scientologist and Expert …

The “soft” sciences are a very recent development in our history. The “soft” sciences and their little gedanken experiments dressed up as “real ” science.

Remember that the age of the “soft sciences” is relatively recent historically speaking, pretty much confined to the late 19th and the 20th centuries, and of course the 21st.

Also remember that the “troubles” we see today are relatively recent. It’s not a coincidence.

Simple really, Good = more God.  Evil = less God.  Gedanken” experiments. sounds “sciency” somehow … must be authentic, right?  BAHH!!! “Soft Science” = soft heads = who cares as long as we get the grants.

The idiot rubes don’t care = useful idiots. So the “soft sciences” dress up Gedankenexperiments in a lot of hocus-pocus to hide the facts that the emperor is naked. Link to a 2018 post that was not available in 2015 but keep in mind that the source is MSN.

Einstein (a 7 hard disciplines super-star) used Gedanken experiments as a way of trying on speculative ideas using one’s imagination but that provenance doesn’t grant them a pass so that they can be used as the basis for policy.

It’s still  “gedankenexperimentung,” which is a German word that is usually translated as “thought-experiments” — by which I understand Einstein meant something like “experiments carried out inside one’s mind,” more or less (native German-speakers are please invited to correct or comment).

In English, a much better translation might be “imaginary experiments,” but the person who first literally translated “gedankenexperimentung” into “thought-experiments” … It is all in the imagination of the experimenter. Like our climate change experts, psychologists, sociologists, anthropologists, neologists, and so on.

In a previous post I mentioned “Nazi Racist” as a favoured epithet amongst the Illuminati of the tolerant left, amongst those who choose to “HATE” the other. and while I don’t particularly like being called a “Nazi”, I really take exception to the “racist” part of the lie.

This whole web of trust has nothing to do with race. NOTHING to do with race. The web of trust depends totally on facts, and logic, and rules and truth. It’s simple, really, depart from “The Truth, the whole Truth, and nothing but the Truth”, and you depart from civilization and everything that our lives, security, health, and prosperity depend on.

Facts as provable items and logic as a process which leads to materially proven advances exist whether the “soft” pink crowd like it or not. And so do I, and my ideas, and my observations, and I don t give a damn what such people say, either.

This abusive intimidation tactic has been used to silence benign, well-meaning people for decades, since at least the 60’s when having long unwashed hair and yelling loud obscenities was painted as making a deep statement about standing for something outside the established culture.

How would a real Nazi respond to being called a racist? Hitler, dude, you’re like a total racist man! That’s a compliment to goose-stepping sons of bitches. The Neo-Nazi’s in modern Germany are proud of being Nazi’s! That’s a badge of pride for them.

Flower_Power_by_Bernie_BostonThere was a famous picture used by the left, (legitimately I think) to encapsulate the “Kent State Experience“.  The use of this kind of symbolism effectively reduces complex issues involving many salient facts into simple emotional knee jerk, “I’m good – your bad” triviality.

The whole “LEFT – RIGHT” meme is deadly in that it effectively hides and obscures reality with a simplistic linear symbol. It brings it all back to the “useful idiot” mechanism and the one’s getting hurt are the tools. By any rational measure the killing fields could not conceivably have been prevented by putting flowers in gun barrels.

That kind of evil eats flower children for breakfast and eats their children for lunch. It simply WAS NOT and IS NOT as simple as the Media agents of the Left would have the tools believe.  At Kent State, both the shooters and the shot were kids. The grown ups of the day are culpable because they failed to teach the kids about reality.

It has only gotten worse since, because those kids are now the grown ups on both sides and they never learned anything growing up. The shrine of the Kent State idiocy is still in flower today.  The most maligned group in America today are the very group who are charged with protecting us from evil. How does blaming the greatest civ in history help?

Only decent people are deterred by such screaming, irrational, in your face obscenities, and that is the entire objective of the abusers, they learned it in their childhood in the schoolyard and at the university.  It works.  Because the Kool-Aide drinkers are just as much totalitarian fascists as the original Nazis were.

They simply cannot stand to co-exist with anyone who disagrees with their enlightened point of view. If you are different you MUST be a stupid Nazi. But not here. Not anymore. You don’t have to take my word for this. Just ramble on over to Being Liberal for your daily dose of poison.

Wherever I look today, I see a full court press of barbarians and savages, of every colour, closing in on all we hold dear, and on the opposite end of the scale I see a “rainbow” of the brilliant, the civilized, and the decent. I see our civilization warts and all.

And you need to understand that this Civilization and the web of good it has developed has nothing to do with RACE and everything to do with Values, and Discipline, and Excellence, and belief in Something Greater than ourselves to Whom we are accountable and which leads us to aspire to greatness, to set high goals and recognize ideals and structures for peaceful exchange as important to our ultimate good.

Rwanda and Bosnia were on different sides of the planet, and their citizens were as different-looking from each other as humans can be, but the horrors each perpetrated during their respective 5 minutes of fame should put to rest forever the idea that a few millimeters of melanin can save us or doom us one way or another.

What we see in the Middle East and Europe and Baltimore, and Ferguson today is simply the result of bad choices and bad philosophies playing out their reality. Bad choices result in bad consequences. Elementary my dear Watson. None of it has ANYTHING to do with RACE!

So, what started out as a good feeling , “thankfulness” about everything wonderful in our civilization and how blessed we are to live at this time and place in history and in thinking about the why of it, it turns into a monologue about what helps and what hinders the operation of the web of trust which we all depend on every day.

In previous posts I have touched on the phenomena of experts in a particular field holding forth on events and possibilities in fields in which they have no expertise at all, and being credited with authority in the second because of their proven authority in the first. The is the phenomenon of Ultracrepidarianism.

It has two sides, one is the expertise that confers authority on the “expert” and can be wide and deep and thoroughly authentic, as in David Suzuki’s commentary on Biotechnology both these links are PDF downloads. The man is nothing short of brilliant in his field.

The other side of Ultracrepidarianism is the authority he, as “expert” carries over into Climatology and it’s potential/ possible outcomes based on his “opinion” about the causes of “Global Climate Change” as it is known today – moving goal posts again. “Change” is a much easier straw man to defend.

Absolute predictions are a hard place to make your stand. “Climate Change” is much easier to defend, than statements like:

*****

The battle to feed all of humanity is over. In the 1970s hundreds of millions of people will starve to death in spite of any crash programs embarked upon now. At this late date nothing can prevent a substantial increase in the world death rate… “.

*****

Suzuki’s Climatology credentials are non-existent. He is certainly is entitled to his opinion just as I am entitled to mine but it must be clearly identified as that, just opinion with no supporting replicable science behind the assumptions.

There is something inherently evil in any assertion regarding what we must do to “save the world” from global warming and that evil is exactly the same as the evil in the pronunciations by Edward East, a Harvard Professor and President of the Genetics Society of America, states in his Eugenics text:

*****

In reality, the Negro is inferior to the White. This is not hypothesis or supposition; it is a crude statement of actual fact. ”The problem of course, is that “inferior” is not a scientifically meaningful category. Like “superior,” “better” and “worse,” it is a value judgement. In their enthusiasm and zeal for the exciting discoveries in genetics, scientists like East confused their own personal values and beliefs with scientifically demonstrated “fact.”

*****

The quote is taken from chapter 8 of the book “An Erratic Journey Through Science and Society  by David Suzuki, Sustainable Development Research Institute, University of British Columbia

Another example of this Ultracrepidarianism phenomenon is Carl Sagan’s transition from Astronomer to Climate Change expert.  Sagan readily admits that the science on this subject is still in its early stages—but then he makes a disastrous error. He states

*****

And yet we ravage the Earth at an accelerated pace, as if it belonged to this one generation, as if it were ours to do with as we please…. Our generation must choose. Which do we value more: short-term profits or the long-term habitability of our planetary home?…

*****

Sagan states that the study of the global climate, the sun’s influence, the comparison of the Earth with other worlds, these are subjects in their earliest stages of development. They are funded poorly and grudgingly, and meanwhile we continue to load the Earth’s atmosphere with materials about whose long-term influence we are almost entirely ignorant.

Can you see the error? Sagan enters this topic with a clear animus against the profit motive and a pre-established belief that industrial civilization is “ravaging the earth.” These are the obvious cultural biases of a late-20th-century modern liberal. So he considers two alternative theories—that we are destroying the planet by cooling it down, or we are destroying the planet by heating it up—and calls for more government funding to figure out which is correct.

But his bias prevents him from seriously considering the obvious third option: that our effect on the Earth’s climate is negligible, any heating or cooling is within the normal range of natural variation, and the benefits of industrial civilization far outweigh any negative effects. But if we don’t treat this as an option, much less as an equally likely option, no government funding is likely to be devoted to pursuing that theory.

This is the original sin of the global warming theory: that it was founded in a presumption of guilt against industrial civilization. All of the billions of dollars in government research funding and the entire cultural establishment that has been built up around global warming were founded on the presumption that we already knew the conclusion—we’re “ravaging the planet”—and we’re only interested in evidence that supports that conclusion.

For this lie we should be willing to destroy the greatest civilization that ever existed? That makes the existence and funding  of these soi-disant experts possible? This “original sin” is exactly the same as Pol Pot’s original sin. The godlike “I”,  knows all, sees all, and has the ONLY correct answer to the problems “I” see.

Coming up!  The New Democratic Party and Alberta!  ….

Cheers

Joe

CSR

Disclaimer for the nit pickers: we take pride in being incomplete, incorrect, inconsistent, and unfair. We do all of them deliberately

 

 

Standard
Pen as Sword - Social Commentary

Web of Trust … part 3

(Note to readers who might find this old post from May 2015:  That was then, this is now, I am adding this on April 14, 2019, almost 4 years on from where I was back in May 2015. I have to emphatically declare that much of what I believe and write about in this and the next three post about “The Web Of Trust” is based on the work of Bill Whittle and his writings at the beginning of the 21st century, about that Web of Trust as he sees it and also to no small degree on his “Tribes” polemic. 

Bill put it all together in a good book called SILENT AMERICA: ESSAYS FROM A DEMOCRACY AT WAR which is well worth reading. Bill articulated very well the headspace of an entire generation of retired vets, workers in the trenches of our modern society, and even many who served in other ways, his Grey Tribe workers … you know who you are.

And he affected the way we resolved the coginitive dissonance we experienced once we left the Armed Services. I had a rather gentle transition spending, as I did, 10 years in the Corrections Service, getting used to “civvie street” again before making a clean break into the world of modern College, University and eventually Government Health Care. Others were not so lucky.)

So we were talking about the 7 “hard” disciplines and how they underlay the entire web of trust which makes our modern civilization work and provides pretty much all of us with an unprecedented standard of living, safety and comfort.

The 7 “hard” disciplines is the complete picture of our civilization’s web of trust in a nutshell – physics, astronomy, chemistry, biology, engineering, computer science and of course mathematics. Everything that makes life safe, prosperous, and even possible for us today depends totally on developments and progress building step upon step in those 7 “hard” disciplines, the development of which stretches all the way back to Aristotle, Plato, and the birth of the Western Philosophical Tradition, a group referred to collectively by the Illuminati of the Pink as Dead White Males in their broadcast Ad Hominum attack on all of recorded history.

And, of course, the total construct of these interrelated “hard science” disciplines rests on a foundation of Catholic Philosophy and the work of hundreds of generations of Catholic scientists, many of whom were (HORRORS!) Catholic Priests. We are never told about that part these days, in the midst of absorbing our Progressive Relativist Revisionist “Social Studies”.

I didn’t just make this up for this blog post. It is common knowledge available to anyone who cares to search rather than get their “wisdom” from the main stream media.

As I mentioned earlier, I use the term “hard” in the sense that these disciplines typically function in an empirical structure that doesn’t care how the student, working scientist, or professor “feels” about developments and results. In the “hard” disciplines we have no room for weaselly distortion and subjective opinion.

No room for feelings. Things either “are” or “are not”. The direction of experimentation always points to “truth” or “fact” or some sort of error or “untruth” which encourages the searcher to try a different tack, revisit his or her thesis or premise and try again. Or you can choose the “soft” approach, the “Pink” approach”, and just chuck out or ignore the bits that don’t support what you are selling.

And so you have the “soft” sciences, the “studies” programs, the subjective, emotional, touchy feely, “investigations” into the human “reality”.  The “soft” sciences are a very recent development in our history. The “soft” sciences only exist because the “hard” sciences were so successful that we developed an incredibly rich civilization.

The 7 hard disciplines applied over centuries allowed mankind to bring into existence a civilization so successful that huge surpluses of wealth and resources existed to support the investigation of areas of human existence where empirical reality has less value and subjective feelings and “Gedanken” experiments reign supreme.

Stated another way, we now observe the sad fact that the very success of the 7 “hard” disciplines in creating an incredible civilization, also gave us enough security, and comfort, and frankly, slack in the system, the culture of slack, for all the “soft science”  areas called “studies” to develop, and even usurp pride of place over the “hard” disciplines which make them possible.

And not only possible but to thrive and flower and release their spores into the surrounding culture. We have become as gods, destroyers of worlds, for the real important world is not actually the physical reality so easily manipulated by the hard disciplines but the much deeper spiritual reality of souls. and verily we are truly destroying the world of the soul, with mockery and belittling in the interest of “Self” worship.

Trinity-Doctrine-NAMELESS

And in the “Just So” stories of our culture, the “soft science gurus” experienced their own “trinitarian”  Epiphany. Their very own “Eureka” moment when they gazed into the mirror of their black souls and saw the perfect reflection of themselves gazing back and  immediately felt total love for that reflection. They became each and every one of them their very own little triune god.

And so it was that in their heart of hearts they KNEW they couldn’t take themselves seriously, knowing themselves and their personal evils as only they did, and not feeling the same respect for themselves that the examining committees are expected to project, they took the only easy way out and began to ridicule God. They became Momos,  and proceeded to attack and destroy anyone who didn’t get in line to worship at the alter of their thesis.

MEOW!

And Lo’ their “Gedanken” experiments were assigned the arbitrary weight of “reality”, until something overwhelmingly and undeniably contradicted  their predictions whereupon they moved the goal posts to a new “Gedankan” position and carried right on, on the theory that no-one would remember what they originally said, and anyway it’s all about getting the grants, and everybody does it, right?

And the practice rubbed off on some of the “hard” science community because they could see, right before their starving eyes, that sensation sells and gets grants and sponsorship and publicity and television shows and so on, and so they too ate of the apple.  And the serpent of egregious relativism entered the garden of science, and the rest is history …

Don’t believe me?  I remember this, ’cause I was there!. If you weren’t then here are some “Historic Notes” courtesy of Wikipedia:

The Population Bomb is/was a best-selling book written by Stanford University Professor of Biology and teacher, Paul R. Ehrlich and his wife, Anne Ehrlich (who was uncredited), in 1968. It warned of the mass starvation of humans in the 1970s and 1980s due to overpopulation, as well as other major societal upheavals, and advocated immediate action to limit population growth (why do they always decide that they have to kill off someone else to solve the problem?).

Fears of a “population explosion” were widespread in the 1950s and 60s, but the book and its author brought the idea to an even wider audience. The book has been criticized since its publishing for its alarmist tone, and in recent decades for its inaccurate predictions.

The Ehrlichs stand by the basic ideas in the book, stating in 2009 that “perhaps the most serious flaw in The Bomb was that it was much too optimistic about the future” and believe that it achieved their goals because “it alerted people to the importance of environmental issues and brought human numbers into the debate on the human future.”

Fact: Erlich trained as an Entomologist (specializing in butterflies). He had no background or training in agronomy or population growth. “The Population Bomb” was written at the suggestion of David Brower the executive director of the environmentalist Sierra Club, and Ian Ballantine of Ballantine Books following various public appearances Ehrlich had made regarding population issues and their relation to the environment.

The Population Bomb began with the statement:  “The battle to feed all of humanity is over. In the 1970s hundreds of millions of people will starve to death in spite of any crash programs embarked upon now. At this late date nothing can prevent a substantial increase in the world death rate…   ”  Nothing weaselly about that prediction. Pretty much lays it on the line. And was dead wrong.  … the book was a huge marketing success and made a LOT of money for the players involved.  Any questions?

or another:

Global cooling will kill us all!! But they didn’t just have a proposed physical mechanism for this catastrophe. They had the evidence of the temperature record, which showed global temperatures generally declining from about 1940 to 1970. Which led to fevered predictions like this one, from UC Davis ecology professor Kenneth Watt: “The world has been chilling sharply for about twenty years. If present trends continue, the world will be about four degrees colder for the global mean temperature in 1990, but eleven degrees colder in the year 2000. This is about twice what it would take to put us into an ice age.”

As late as 1980, Carl Sagan was still presenting global cooling as one of two possible doomsday scenarios we could choose from. The series “Cosmos” marks the precise moment of change, when the goal posts were moved.  This is a bit of a cultural time capsule, preserving the precise moment at which scientific alarmists were switching from warning about a new ice age, in the 1970s, to warning about runaway warming. …

so, “soft science”, moving goal posts, changing stories, relativism, denial, plausible deniability, … to be continued …

Cheers

Joe

CSR

Disclaimer for nitpickers: We take pride in being incomplete, incorrect, inconsistent, and unfair. We do all of them deliberately

Standard