Saturday, January 1, 2011

Why Do We Let Dishonest Science Flourish in our Parishes, Schools and Communities?

Climate Distortions Were Achieved. National Weather Agencies Are The Trojan Horses
Here is yet another article about how the corruption of science by a political process has been hoisted on the public. We all need to take part of the blame when we did not point out to the youth that the teacher is not qualified to know everything. G. K. Chesterton had it right saying that if they are not teaching a dogma, they are not teaching. Even the weather has come under the title of relative as I can testify to the popular notion of global warming because I feel it is warmer than it was ten years ago. To take something as necessary to all survival on this planet like carbon dioxide and say it is poisoning us is just crazy. We have made the kindergarten teacher who gets a day off in the classroom by going to a seminar with a lunch where they hear someone present nonsense as if it is science, so that our kids will come home and form us. No, it is suppose to be us forming the belief system of our children and the school teaching the kids how to use their senses to think and seek the truth. Of course, truth is an antiquated concept. All good intelligent people are naturally members of the liberal elite and they know the truth is relative.

And to think, the Catholic Coalition on Climate Change thinks they should support the lies of the corrupted sad.

1 comment:

  1. As the article points out:
    "The consensus argument appeared early using the IPCC, but the majority are bureaucrats from government weather offices, not scientists. As John McLean notes, “The evidence shows that the claim of “4000 scientific experts supported the IPCC’s claims” is dishonest in almost every word. There were not 4000 people, but just under 2900; they were not all scientists; and it seems that they were not all experts. There is only evidence that about 60 people explicitly supported the claim, although that might not mean much given the vested interests and lack of impartiality of many authors and reviewers.” "