My War on Science

In a geocentric universe the sun has nothing whatsoever to do with earth's climate.

That’s right. I’m waging a personal war on science at home and abroad. It is, nonetheless, a limited war whose prosecution is not aimed at destroying science. The aims of my war are simply to hold “science” accountable for its claims.

Progressives love to “question authority,” but only when the authority in question that’s being questioned does not toe the Progressive line. Those authorities that do, however, are not in line for questioning; they are to be believed without question.

And, if you do question Progressive authorities you will be smeared as a racist, a homophobe, anti-science or even as the clichéd and worn-out Nazi Holocaust denier. There will be no debate, since debate would expose the single-minded, irrational totalitarianism of Progressive ideology.

There are various areas where this applies, but I’ll tackle two of the most recent and newsworthy battles: Evolution and global warming/climate change. Recently, someone asked Rick Perry about evolution, to which he replied that it’s a theory with “gaps” in it. He also mentioned that he’s not sure how old the earth is.

Inevitably, the Progressive priesthood cried foul and began to brand Perry as an ignoramus who is waging a war on science. To add insult to injury, Perry is skeptical of man-caused climate change, or global warming, or whatever. This was too much for Rolling Stone’s Jeff Goodell, who opined:

Never mind that larger droughts in the southwestern U.S. have long been predicted by scientists who model the changes we are likely to face due to ever-rising levels of CO2 in the atmosphere. 

Never mind that Texas dumps more carbon pollution into the atmosphere than any other state in the nation – higher than California and Pennsylvania combined.  Were it a separate country, Texas would be the seventh largest carbon polluter in the world.

Never mind that, during his first term, Perry signed legislation to speed construction of 11 new coal plants for the state. Or that he has lead [sic] the charge to undermine the EPA’s right to limit greenhouse gas pollution. 

None of this matters. Because as Perry wrote in his new book, global warming is “all one contrived phony mess that is falling apart under its own weight.” Still, the earth’s climate is changing, and so we must pray.

God help us.

Note that Goodell does not address scientific skepticism about global warming (climate change, whatever), of which there is plenty out there. Rather, his evidence is that there’s weather, Texas is trying to generate energy for its citizens and Perry believes in God. This is the typical line of reasoning on the Progressive left, since those who have completely bought into evolution and global warming have bought into a religion.

Also note Goodell’s contempt for the Constitution. Goodell says that Perry seeks to undermine the EPA’s “right” to limit greenhouse gas pollution. Under the Constitution, the EPA has no “right” to do so. That “right” is restricted to Congress and well it should be since members of Congress were duly elected by the people. Where do I go to vote out the EPA? That’s right. I can’t.

Just as Galileo’s inquisitors were fully invested in a geocentric universe, Progressives have morphed theory into dogma. Progressives are philosophically wedded to both theories – evolution and global warming – because they both degrade the individual as a polluter and cosmic accident.

Rather than a special creation with basic rights endowed by the Creator, the individual is of very little worth and should be subservient to the so-called “public” good. As a polluter and contributor to global warming, the individual needs to be restricted and restrained by those who know better, because the planet is more important than the individual. As the Apostle Paul put it: “They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator, who is forever praised. Amen.”

Please note that “those who know better” are exempt from the rules they create to restrict, restrain and regulate the masses. This brings to mind a passage from my favorite book in the Chronicles of Narnia series by C.S. Lewis:

Well, then, it was jolly rotten of you,” said Digory.

“Rotten?” said Uncle Andrew with a puzzled look. “Oh, I see. You mean that little boys ought to keep their promises. Very true: most right and proper, I’m sure, and I’m very glad you have been taught to do it. But of course you must understand that rules of that sort, however excellent they may be for little boys – and servants – and women – and even people in general can’t possibly be expected to apply to profound students and great thinkers and sages. No, Digory. Men like me, who possess hidden wisdom, are freed from common rules just as we are cut off from common pleasures. Ours, my boy is a high and lonely destiny.”

As he said this he sighed and looked so grave and noble and mysterious that for a second Digory really thought he was saying something rather fine. But then he remembered the ugly look he had seen on his Uncle’s face the moment before Polly had vanished: and all at once he saw through Uncle Andrew’s grand words. “All it means,” he said to himself, “Is that he thinks he can do anything he likes to get anything he wants.”

2 responses to “My War on Science

  1. You present strong scientific evidence contradicting progressives who believe in the theory of global warming based solely on science. However, where is your scientific evidence against the progressive belief of evolution? That is, you want to hold “science” accountable for its claims about evolution along with global warming. Yet, the only alternative theory to evolution you propose appears to be linked to Creationism. As a progressive who doesn’t see enough evidence in global warming and definitely thinks there are underlying motives guiding the movement, I take offense to your attack on evolution. Not because you disagree with it, but because you attack it’s scientific credibility and dogmatic following. Unlike climate change, I challenge you to provide a more “rationale”, “logical, and less dogmatic scientific explanation for how we mankind came to be than the theory of evolution. If you want science to be held accountable, you must point out what science is failing to account for in the theory of evolution. The only reason why I believe this is important is because you site global warming and evolution as the two ways progressives don’t “practice what they preach”. However, you only justify one.

  2. Hey Deb,

    I’ll post something about my issues with evolution. It’s a complex subject, and my point in this post was that you’re labeled “anti-science” if you don’t agree that the evolution should be taught as what it is… a theory. It is not fact. I suggest reading some of Michael Behe’s work on the subject: Darwin’s Black Box and The Edge of Evolution. Neither Behe nor I are “creationists” in the classic sense, or in the sense that progressives like to label those who believe in a creator/designer. The term “creationist” carries with it the baggage of a belief in a young earth (thousands, rather than billions), and that there is no such thing as adaptation. There are big holes in evolution, but many scientists and lay people are wedded to the materialistic philosophy behind it, thus blinding them to other evidence, such as the evidence from molecular biology.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s