Yesterday we saw a major demonstration of the Democrats trying to follow in the footsteps of president Obama. For most of his presidency, Obama used convenient straw men to argue his positions. Obama created phony positions for his opponents and argued against those rather than addressing the actual opposition position. The media never questioned it. For example, Obama pulled every American soldier out of Iraq and the resulting vacuum allowed ISIS to form. When addressing criticism of that obvious mistake, Obama always presented the choice as one between keeping over 100,000 American troops in Iraq or withdrawing them. The problem with that argument, of course, is that no one was advocating to keep such a huge force in Iraq. The issue was whether the last 15 or 20 thousand troops should remain in that country until real peace had been established. Obama argued for his actions by being dishonest about his opponents.
Yesterday brought the big March For Science by the left. It wasn't that big, to be fair, but it was covered like a major event. Here's the problem with that march and the coverage: there are no large groups in this country who are against science. In fact, being for science is the consensus position in America. What the marchers were actually promoting was the supposed science of man made global warming. That is more religion than science. We know, after all, that for the last 18 years there has been a pause in the warming trend previously observed. We also know that the analysis which supposedly disproved that pause turned out to be the result of fiddling with the numbers. This phony analysis was presented to world leaders right before the Paris climate summit a few years ago, and the dishonesty was only recently uncovered. We also know that that none of the models on which climate change theory relies have been able to predict the weather of the last two decades. Despite non-stop predictions of a huge increase in severe weather events, the number and intensity of hurricanes have been at a long term low. Simply put, the actual events, i.e., the observational data, have not agreed with the theory. For someone who supports science, that should mean that the theory is wrong. Yesterday's marchers, however, did not care about the actual data; they are true believers, not scientists.
Yesterday brought the big March For Science by the left. It wasn't that big, to be fair, but it was covered like a major event. Here's the problem with that march and the coverage: there are no large groups in this country who are against science. In fact, being for science is the consensus position in America. What the marchers were actually promoting was the supposed science of man made global warming. That is more religion than science. We know, after all, that for the last 18 years there has been a pause in the warming trend previously observed. We also know that the analysis which supposedly disproved that pause turned out to be the result of fiddling with the numbers. This phony analysis was presented to world leaders right before the Paris climate summit a few years ago, and the dishonesty was only recently uncovered. We also know that that none of the models on which climate change theory relies have been able to predict the weather of the last two decades. Despite non-stop predictions of a huge increase in severe weather events, the number and intensity of hurricanes have been at a long term low. Simply put, the actual events, i.e., the observational data, have not agreed with the theory. For someone who supports science, that should mean that the theory is wrong. Yesterday's marchers, however, did not care about the actual data; they are true believers, not scientists.
No comments:
Post a Comment