07 September 2011

Lessons For Academia



Attention man-made global warming believers: Please stand over there with the flat-earth folks.

Partisan politics in your field of expertise will eventually catch up with you. Even the National Journal of Science is not immune from the reality of facts.



After 20 years of academic supremacy and hundreds of billions of dollars of costs; the Anthropogenic Global Warming theory seems headed for the dust bin of history. Perhaps the admirable action of the Nature Journal of Science to place scientific integrity above partisan politics will be a valuable lesson for the scientific community in the future.
"Oh what a tangled web we weave, When first we practice to deceive!" ~ Sir Walter Scott

I (as well as many others) have been pointing out here for months - no years - that man-made global warming was a farce being shoved down our throats by members of the ruling class in academia and government for more of our money and more control over our lives, as well as to somehow bring meaning to their own lives.  

There are those in academia doing the same thing with history and for many of the same reasons. 

And here's yet another example of what happens when an academic realizes that facts do not always fit neatly "into a theory or a data set."

5 comments:

Brock Townsend said...

Can't remember if I've posted this here before or no, so........

http://www.namsouth.com/viewtopic.php?t=2219&highlight=robinson
More than 31,000 American scientists have signed the following petition which Dr. Art Robinson initiated. His Power Point Presentation below compares their findings against the opposition, and lists the names of the scientists who signed.

Michael Lynch said...

Name some names. If there are academic historians out there who are knowingly engaged in fraud in their work, I think we need to know who they are, so they can go the way of Michael Bellesiles and be stripped of their prizes, book contracts, and teaching positions.

--ML

Richard G. Williams, Jr. said...

Michael - fraud is your word, not mine. However, if you want to include plagiarism as part of the definition, I can think of a couple. The point of the post is that it is becoming increasingly evident that many (not all, of course) academics use their craft to promote their worldview; whether that's science, economics, or history (while claiming objectivity). Some even admit that they are "activist historians." No one is totally immune from bias - right or left, Christian or secularist. It then comes down to whose worldview is the correct one and can one support that worldview w/evidence. The global warmers could not, so they doctored their "facts", suppressed debate, and attempted to marginalize anyone who disagreed with them. They got caught. I've seen that same mindset manifested in other disciplines, including history. One suggested on another blog that anyone who disagreed with a certain aspect of Civil War interpretation should be jailed.

The other reference to the article by the Yale law professor simply points out that "theory" often runs head on into reality. Current events give us some great illustrations. Many academics, like most who work in the Obama administration, have never held a job in the private sector. They applying their leftist "theories" which are also running head on into reality. How's that working out?

Michael Lynch said...

Well, you used the term "deceive" and referred to a "farce being shoved down our throats," and then said that academics in history are doing the same thing, so I don't think my assumption was an unreasonable one.

Was the person who suggested that proponents of a particular Civil War interpretation be jailed an academic historian, or somebody who just left a comment on a blog?

--ML

Richard G. Williams, Jr. said...

No, not unreasonable, just incorrect. I can see how you would make that assumption though. Perhaps I should have been a bit more clear. Anyway, I hope you at least see my point, even though you may disagree.

As to your question, both. What was just as worrisome was the lack of "shock" from others commenting.