Yet again Andrew Montford performs sterling work detailing how Britain’s Royal Society has sold out to political dogma about man-made global warming.
We all associate the world’s pre-eminent science association with the great Sir Isaac Newton and the birth of the Scientific Method. It’s fair to say the Royal Society is perhaps the ‘canary in the coal’ mine as to the real extent of corporate corruption within our national institutions.
On the same day Montford’s blog ‘Bishop Hill’ reveals yet more dirt on the RS we see further announcements from top scientists that they’ve had enough of the stench of this sleaze. Der Spiegel (February 8, 2012) report that another top German Scientist admits he was “duped on Climate Change.” At last the tide is turning against this most monumental sleaze.
“The climate catastrophe is not occurring,” says Dr. Fritz Vahrenholt, “Dozens of solar researchers agree with me.”
Like a growing phalanx of skeptics Dr. Vahrenholt now recognizes that multi-national corporate/government-funded junk sciences have prevailed for years employing a systematic ‘divide and conquer’ approach to stymie skeptical opposition. The flight of the R.S. from the traditional Scientific Method typifies the modern malaise. But no longer will the scientific community – part of that oppressed ’99 percent’ – remain gagged by a self-serving Global Elite.
The root of the problem was first prophetically identified by no less than U.S. President Dwight D. Eisenhower. In his final speech as president he warned, the future tyranny we must all confront is the new megolith of govt/corporate science; it now holds by far the biggest purse strings, sways the clueless media, grabs the kudos and seduces the journals and the academies – and thus the public minds.
We now see how right Eisenhower was. We are confronting a greater threat to humanity than that posed by the man-made global warming fraud. Underlying this heinous mass deception is a battle waged against the even more pervasive macrocosm; the struggle between the traditional scientific method (sometimes referred to the English Scientific Method) versus post-normal science.
Vahrenholt laments, “The IPCC is more of a political than a scientific body.” But grassroots scientists i.e. those men and women not on the (carrot & stick) government/corporate juggernaut who bravely speak out, still have no cohesive voice or forum to rally any meaningful opposition. They need to unite and protest their cause just as the ‘occupy’ movement has confronted Wall Street’s own version of this ugly behemoth and slay the dragon.
We man-made global warming skeptics have long recognized that there is a coordinated gatekeeping system that has its roots in controlling the mainstream science journals which, in turn, sways the mainstream media, which, in turn, sways public opinion on scientific issues. This is because, as a rule, the general public defers to authority on matters of science that are esoteric or beyond summary with a short and simple explanation. That’s how politicians can skew the flow of research dollars to serve their corporate string-pullers.
Recently, thanks solely to the world wide web, we have made big strides towards educating more of the public that climatology, like economics and social science ( including psychology) are ‘soft’ sciences readily co-opted by the prevailing political agenda to control societies.
But the war between empiricism (the province of physical proofs) versus post-normalism (the domain of dogmatism) began long before the climate alarmism that took hold in the 1980’s. The greater underlying conflict ensued from early in the 20th century when empiricism was given a back seat after modern theoretical physics caught on. Thereafter, post-normalism (where experimental proofs are routinely ignored and ‘consensus’ is king) became sexy and was soon adopted as the choice tool of government/corporate interests – plied routinely by the mainstream science journals.
Unless and until everyone around the world who still values the traditional Scientific Method wises up and unites under the banner of experimentally robust and transparent (REAL) science, then the anti-intellectual fascism of post-normalism will triumph.That is why an organization such as Principia Scientific International (PSI) is ABSOLUTELY a minimum requirement. http://principia-scientific.org/
We must be less inchoate and endeavor to bring under one umbrella scientists, engineers, mathematicians and related experts from around the globe who are prepared to put first and foremost the one abiding principle – strict adherence to the Scientific Method. The rigors of transparency and replicability by experiment are the very best instruments for truth and as such need to be adopted by institutions worldwide to be upheld by equally robust freedom of information laws (FOIA).
Absent such safeguards the ‘high priests’ of post-normal science will forever dictate to the flocks of grassroots scientists as to what ‘holy’ path they must follow (surely to dystopia). As an exciting paradigm shift is now underway in climate science it is the opportune moment for us to lobby all those friends of science and transparent, principled research to join together to support such a venture as PSI and begin the Renaissance of Truth.