Once again I link to Lubos Motl's Reference Frame where he posts a memo on a nightmarish but open confession that truth just doesn't matter which also provides concrete proof that: "Government encouragement does not order men to believe that the false is true, it merely makes them indifferent to the issue of truth or falsehood."--Ayn Rand
Lubos tells us: "Hulme tells us that if the scientists are going to be listened to in the future, they must "recognize the social limits of their truth seeking" - WOW. ;-) They must thus "trade truth for influence" - WOW. He also says that the "climate change is too important to be left to scientists" - WOW - "least of all the normal ones" - WOW. Hulme promotes the idea that the climate science should become a "post-normal science" - WOW. He says that the "danger" of the "normal science" is that it assumes that the truth is found before the policies are created - WOW."
Wow is an understatement. This kind of thing could keep one awake at night. Evidently, Mike Hulme is a professor of environmental sciences at the university of East Anglia. The memo links to a Gaurdian article where you can read all the gruesome details.
12 comments:
These statements are stunning, but I'm glad they make such honest statements instead of lying. Critics of environmentalism get a lot of mileage out of these lapses of honesty. I don't know how many times I've read the quote about the right virus wiping out a billion people, or the one about crocodiles eating humans as their "dainties." within the last 10 years another environmentalist said something to the effect that keeping people alarmed was more important than scientific accuracy. This honesty should be encouraged, because the environmentalist movement has thrived on lies from the beginning. People think environmentalism is about keeping the air and water clean, when it is really an assault on capitalism, progress, technology, etc.
You're right of course. There may be some true believers who actually think they are in it to save nature but most are man-hating, capitalism-hating leftists. If I see any more honesty like this I'll print it instantly.
Please do, Mike. I'm still trying to find the quotes from the 'viros from a few years back when Bjorn Lomberg's book was published that said basically the same thing.
Inspector:
go to this site http://www.environmentalism.com/ and scroll down to "Quotes by enviromentalists". There are three on that page and a link to a lot more.
Those comments are EXACTLY what we need them to say, in order to demonstrate how hypocritical the extreme environmentalists are. They are NOT in their field for the science, they're in their to push there whim-ridden legislation and controls on all of us, all for Holy "Mother Earth".
Mike,
Got it:
"We have to offer up scary scenarios, make simplified dramatic statements, and make little mention of any doubts we may have. Each of us has to decide what the right balance is between being effective and being honest."
Environmentalist activist Stephen Schneider, Discover Magazine, 1989
You guys are having yourselves on; it's the old story of to fit a complex scientific concept into a 10 second media grab that they are grappling with.
I wonder whether you would be similarity outraged to find out that your government has been censoring what science has to say about global warming and fossil-fuel emissions. http://search.smh.com.au/click.ac?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.smh.com.au%2Fnews%2Fenvironment%2Fscientists-muzzled-congress-told%2F2007%2F03%2F20%2F1174153066947.html&t=4&n=2&s=censor+climate+science
I'll keep an eye out for responses. I have a feeling that you are all groupthinking sheep guilelessly spouting Objectivism , but we will see.
Hope the link works:
http://www.smh.com.au/news/environment/scientists-muzzled-congress-told/2007/03/20/1174153066947.html
Not working - anyway _ was referring to James Hansen's testimony to US House of Reps of gov't interference in how he reports his science to the public.
Your government wants to decide what you should know. That's why you pay tax.
All the more reason to get government out of science in the first place. Science is not a legitimate function of government, only the protection of individual rights.
"I have a feeling that you are all groupthinking sheep guilelessly spouting Objectivism , but we will see."
Mike, why do you let this guy put such ridiculous comments on your blog? I could understand if the person simply dislikes Objectivism but still wanted to discuss things in an intelligent manner, but he's baselessly accusing your readers of being, I don't know, "Randoids", I suppose. It's simply an eyesore.
MC: You're right about getting the government out of science of course. That's why I'll keep on writing to my reps and LTEs to the Detroit papers. Last year I had an LTE on global warming printed in the Washington Times. Perhaps I should do more of this expanding my reach.
Roderick: Thanks for the defense. As to why I haven't banned Wadard yet, I have a policy of responding at least once no matter how irrational the attack is so that the commenter will know where I stand. Then, I give a warning or an invitation not to comment any more. This will give the commenter a chance to clean up his act. If he doesn't, I will hit the gong by going to moderated comments. But I don't want to do that to all my readers because of one commenter who wants to play 'Gotcha'. But I will if I have to.
Post a Comment