2012 Heat is Latest Politically Correct “science”
Everyone is supposed to know that 2012 was the hottest year ever. It was in all the news (as demonstrated by P. J. Gladnick):
So declared the New York Times in an article almost dripping with self-righteous jubilation. This sentiment was also echoed at the Los Angeles Times, the Washington Post, Reuters, and many other media outlets.
The NYT knows its readers well, and the NYT is pretty confident that its readers won’t bother asking whether this was a regional phenomenon or a global one or whether the temperature data could have been fudged – again. Whereas, the independent thinker will have been immediately suspicious because most other politically correct “scientific” conclusions have proven to cherry pick the data and then fudge the remaining data – especially climate “science”.
First, this was the 9th hottest year in the last 34 according to satellite data. The discrepancy is because the alarmist data only considers the continental US.
Well, that was easy. The 2012 heat is just more politically correct junk science.
The 2012 heat reminds me of the hockey stick chart, whose falsification became know as Climategate. The hockey stick chart was never real science. It was created by only one “scientist” – Michael Mann, and it was accepted without being scientifically reproduced by real scientists. He created algorithms designed to produce a hockey stick chart. He created a single new data sample and ignored all the existing and contradictory data samples. When temperatures in his new data sample actually went down at end instead of up, Michael Mann decided to “hide the decline” by replacing that segment of his data with other data that went the direction he needed. When two non-scientists tried to reproduce his results, he not only refused to cooperate, but he and his accomplices decided to change the definition of peer review if necessary to stop them from getting published.
Regardless of degrees, titles, and authority, do the Climategate “scientists” sound like real scientists to you?
From: Phil Jones. To: Many. Nov 16, 1999
“I’ve just completed Mike’s Nature [the science journal] trick of adding in the real temps to each series for the last 20 years (ie, from 1981 onwards) and from 1961 for Keith’s to hide the decline.”
From Phil Jones To: Michael Mann (Pennsylvania State University). July 8, 2004
“I can’t see either of these papers being in the next IPCC report. Kevin and I will keep them out somehow — even if we have to redefine what the peer-review literature is!”
Most politically correct “science” doesn’t even pass the smell test. For example:
- Would a 1.5 foot sea level rise over 100 years really be catastrophic?
- Are we really free and safe when only the government has guns?
- Regulation is more effective than reputation/competition/contracts?
- If you believe in evolution, wouldn’t a gay gene die out immediately?
- Are there really no differences between races except for skin color?
- Are men and women really the same except for how they’re raised?
So called “liberals” have moved forward and are no longer interested in freedom and tolerance. Instead, everyone must be the same, everyone must believe the same, and everyone must be controlled. Even your carbon footprint must be controlled – which requires a global government, of course. Some may call this liberalism, political correctness, progressivism, socialism, globalism, collectivism, or communism, but it is always – fascism.