Academic Stalinism: Climate change edition

From David Limbaugh:

A claque of 20 climate scientists, in an open letter, urged Obama and Attorney General Loretta Lynch to use the federal Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act to criminally investigate “corporations and other organizations that have knowingly deceived the American people about the risks of climate change.”

Knowingly deceived? That’s rich, coming from a barely disguised political movement tainted by well-documented fraud and corruption.

Stalin just made inconvenient facts and people disappear.

If history has taught us anything, it is that science is not a matter of consensus and that so-called consensus has been wrong so often that it’s amazing these charlatans have the audacity to keep puffing their chests. Every other day, we see a new story debunking some long-held scientific “truth.”

Sure, One site I work at, we can hardly keep up, and that’s on a narrow range of issues.

Virtually all of modern science broke with “consensus,” which is why we call it modern science.

But academic science does not want to solve problems created by consensus thinking:

“Placing more emphasis on diversity of political beliefs when hiring,” says Cornell government professor Andrew Little, would “almost certainly require sacrificing on general quality or other dimensions of diversity.” In other words, conservatives are anti-intellectual rubes.More.

As noted here, monochromatic bias is always bad for creativity.

Usually, the defenders of consensus in science as such know at some level that they are mistaken or wilfully wrong. But if they can enforce their viewpoint, it matters little. Look for governments that are failing in their basic duty to protect citizens to support them, especially in societies where the citizens are content with rhetoric and brush off real-world failures of policy or blame them on opponents of government.

  • tom_billesley

    Climate Change, the new Lysenkoism.

  • Hard Little Machine

    Does that mean that academics who knowingly obscure the facts of terrorism are terrorists? I think legally it does. At the least they are guilty of a criminal conspiracy to foment terrorism.

  • Xavier

    “…other organizations that have knowingly deceived the American people about the risks of climate change.”

    Double plus ungood for Michael Mann and Phil Jones, then.