The Grand Litany of False Science

A couple of days ago I blogged about the dead hand of Trofim Lysenko touching the junk science of global warming.

Bruce Walker, writing at the American Thinker, includes a long list of the many politics-before-science false prophets:

Perhaps the most egregious ghost is Trofim Lysenko, the man who ruled the life sciences of Soviet Russia from the late 1920s until the early 1960s. He had a theory which fit Marxism perfectly: acquired characteristics can be inherited. This is not true, of course, but Lysenko had the Politburo and Stalin behind him. It was science that fit the political needs of the Bolsheviks, and so it was science backed by the awful power of the party and the state.

He adds a chilling warning that:

Those who hijack science, however, are not interested in truth. They have created a false history of science which asserts absurd lies like "medieval Christians believed the Earth was flat." (Not only is that not true, but the religious influence upon science tended to confirm that the Earth was a sphere, and Christians of the time had the truest calculation of the circumference of the Earth of anyone around.)  The men who founded modern science -- Galileo, Copernicus, Kepler, Pascal, Napier, Newton, and others -- were much more religious than their contemporaries. Those who hijack science for personal and political reasons pretend that religion interfered with science, but this is no more than a power-hungry agnostic's narcotic delusion.

Mr. Walker adds one ominous warning to his article.

This fraud has left many ghosts. "Aryan" science pretended, for a time, to be rooted in real science. Many Nazis considered their vile rites to be steeped in pure science, and they condemned the religious sentimentality of those who thought that men are men and not livestock.

American Thinker: The Ghost of Lysenko

Big Government » Blog Archive » ClimateGate Is Not The First Time Progressive Scientists Have Lied To The World

Andrew Marcus posts at BigGovernment.com about the sordid history of junk science serving its political master.

Now that global warming is being exposed as a gross manipulation of junk science, it is important to remember that this is not the first time in our nation’s history that the Progressive community has used junk science in order to force their social agenda on an unsuspecting population.

And let’s not forget that example from the other liberal fascists – the Marxists. They came up with the wacky concept of plant genetics known as lysenkoism.

Trofim Lysenko, under Josef Stalin’s protection and guidance, set Russian and Soviet genetics back decades.

The introductory paragraph in Wikipedia is a prophetic warning:

Lysenkoism was a set of repressive political and social campaigns in science and agriculture by the powerful Stalinist director of the Soviet Lenin All-Union Institute of Agricultural Sciences, Trofim Denisovich Lysenko and his followers, which began in the late 1920s and formally ended in 1964.

“…[R]epressive political and social campaigns…” That is about as apt a description of the global warming effort as any you could find.

We need to repeat the condemnation of junk science whenever and wherever it rears it’s snout, lest we forget our lessons.

Can You Say Show Trial

Barack Obama and his AG, Holder, must really want to emulate Barack’s friends in Latin America.

Not those silly democratic ones – the Socialist ones.

Here’s Senator Kohl questioning Holder last week:

KOHL: But taking into account that you never know what happens when you walk into a court of law, in the event that for whatever reason they do not get convicted, what would be your next step? I'm sure you must have talked about it.

HOLDER: What I told the prosecutors and what I will tell you and what I spoke to them about is that failure is not an option. Failure is not an option. This -- these are cases that have to be won. I don't expect that we will have a contrary result.

The more they try to make this look both legal and a "sure thing," the more they look like small “s” socialists who can't even run a show trial correctly.

Chavez, Castro, Putin and Hu must be laughing in their sleeves.

Power Line - Reading Bin Laden His Rights

From Skepticism To Outrage

This ought to be printed and handed out anytime Elmer Gantry Al Gore tries to pitch his hokum:

Thanks to hackers (or an insider) who broke into The University of East Anglia's Climatic Research Unit (CRU) and downloaded 156 megaybytes of data including extremely damaging emails, we now know that data supporting the global warming thesis was completely fabricated.

Lots of details coming to light.

H/T Mish’s Global Economic Trend Analysis

Google Reader (958)

Is This The Real Motivation For An Otherwise Stupid Decision?

Andrew McCarthy posts at the National Review Online about AG Holder’s testimony regarding the decision to try Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and others in New York.

One of the points stuck out at me as a possible underlying explanation for why this decision was made:

8. For eight years justice has been delayed — no longer, "It is past time to finally act." Holder, of course, does not mention the role of his firm and others in delaying and derailing the military commissions during their representation of America's enemies.

So Holder’s old firm, among others, has been benefiting from working the defense of these scumbags already. If they take on these cases in New York, they could reap millions of federal dollars in fees.

Hmmm.

And all the delays that have taken place so far are largely due to the death by a thousand delays perpetrated by Holder’s old law firm and others.

At least they’re consistent in their behavior and goals – freedom for the oppressed terrorists.

Cutting Out The Crap

A friend sent me an article by Ralph Peters in the New York Post. It was about the scumbag Islamist terrorist at Ft. Hood.

 

He added a link to a very blunt and clear-spoken post by J.R. Saltzman at Lumberjack in the Desert.

I’m more than a little angry right now. Yes, I’m irate that some sh-tbag Major (“sh-tbag” is often used as a technical term in the Army) opened fire on a group of his fellow Soldiers killing 12 and wounding 30. But that’s not even what is under my skin right now. What is bothering me is the general reaction of our media and those stupid enough to think this was not an act of terrorism, but was caused by supposed PTSD caused at Walter Reed Army Medical Center.

Mr. Saltzman asks the question that none of the apologists for the scumbag terrorist will ask:

If you can get PTSD from treating soldiers at Walter Reed Army Medical Center then why the hell haven't more people snapped? Why haven't all the therapists in physical therapy and occupational therapy, and all the staff on Ward 57 ran around shooting up the place?

His answer is blunt and irrefutable:

So why haven't they gone crazy? Because you don't get PTSD from sitting on your ass around Walter Reed. Not only is it not possible to “catch” secondhand PTSD, but it is not that kind of a place. I would know, I was a patient there for nine months.

Mr. Saltzman knows what he’s talking about. Those other arm-chair psychologists and apologists don’t know what they’re talking about. They just want to blame the victims and excuse the attackers.

The real question that should be asked is why would anyone want to find excuses for the horrific acts that scumbag Hassan did?

Newt’s Nose Gets Swatted

By Investors Business Daily.

They have an biting editorial on the NY-23 race in which the following swat goes out to New Gingrich for backing a Spectre-Rebpublican:

Now that Scozzafava has, in an act of incalculable pettiness, endorsed the Democrat in the race, Bill Owens, Gingrich looks like a professor at the Mister Magoo school of political science.

Mr. MaGingrich must feel really happy with his public statement supporting Scozzafava now that she’s openly supported the Democrat in the race.

All she’s shown is that she and the state party apparatus are most comfortable with the old school, back room politics, not this public, open debate on issues.

Sarah Palin looks a lot more principled about this race than Mr. MaGingrich does.

Investors.com - Principles And Pettiness In NY-23

Who’s Getting The Payoffs

One big reason the Democrats don’t want anyone to read the bill for health care reform is that we find out who’s getting the payoffs. Investors Business Daily does some of the work Congressional Democrats don’t want us to do.

One of the winners – trail lawyers:

"A state is not eligible for the incentive payments," reads the bill, "if that state puts a law on the books that limits attorneys' fees or imposes caps on damages."

In other words, states that have the nerve to rein in frivolous medical malpractice lawsuits — and that's 85% of them, according to a Harvard study — would be punished if they also established medical courts where health care experts, rather than untrained juries, settle injury disputes based on actual medical science.

Well, so much for being concerned about cutting the costs of medical insurance and reforming malpractice.

Next up – the unions:

Other tainted nuggets turned over in the health care bill include payoffs to organized labor through a federal pay scale for nurses based on union wages, and a training grant program for nurses that will fund only unionized businesses.

Hmm, health care ‘reform’ and card check. Now we see who has been bankrolling Obama’s and the other liberal Democrats.

They all want their payoffs now.

Who else gets to be a winner in this disgusting travesty of reform? Only time and a thorough reading of the bill will tell. Let’s hope we get the chance to do that.

H/T Investors Business Daily

A Question For Both The Guest And The Host

Gateway Pundit posts on the report in Politico that Valerie Jarrett claims that the withdrawal of Dede Scozzafava from the NY-23 race shows how radical the Republican party is.

Mr. Hoft’s (author of Gateway Pundit) question to Ms. Jarrett is:

So was Jarrett even following the race or was she just being dishonest on purpose?
Scozzafava was, of course, the GOP leadership’s candidate.
The GOP (and Daily Kos) endorsed her.

A good and fair question.

Looking at the Politico text, though, I’m struck by what “the dog didn’t do,”

White House senior adviser Valerie Jarrett said Sunday on ABC’s “This Week” that the rise of a Conservative Party challenger in a closely watched upstate New York House election shows that the Republican Party leadership is “becoming more and more extreme, and more and more marginalized.”

Is George Stephanopoulos as willfully ignorant of the circumstances in the NY-23 race as Jarrett wants us to believe she, herself, is? If not, then why didn’t he immediately challenge her “3 Stooges” slap at the Republicans when they didn’t do anything to deserve it? Why didn’t Stephanopoulos point out that Scozzafava was THE CHOICE of the Republican part in New York, and they were therefore actually more guilty of trying to be like Democrats than acting ‘radical.’

One would assume that an interviewer on a political talk show would challenge assertions made by a guest that conflict with the facts.

But then one would frequently be wrong nowadays.

How Many Lessons Do Americans Need?

I found this article by Mary Anastasia O’Grady in the Wall Street Journal Online, “ARgentina’s Kirchner Targets the Press.”

The way it starts out, though, was startling.

One way a president can boost poll numbers in a bad economy is to wrest control of the central bank and start printing lots of pesos. There's nothing like cheap financing to restore the market's enthusiasm for buying all sorts of stuff—from stocks to houses—already on sale at fire sale prices.

The great reflation will make people feel rich again. A weak currency will also be a short-term boon to exporters, whose profits can then be taxed at ever higher rates. Complainers can be denounced for their greed.

Geez, now who does that sound like?

Of course, O’Grady has to drag us back to the headline – it’s about Argentina, not the U.S.

Of course this perpetual motion machine will eventually conk out and when it does, a government that expects to survive will find it necessary to silence its critics. Just ask Argentines, who are living all of this in real time.

Then, she reminds us that this article isn’t just about Argentina,

Hugo Chávez has become a dictator in Venezuela under the guise of democracy, and he has similarly shut down the free press. Argentines are worried.

There is a lesson here for all democracies, especially the one we live in,

Last week in the Argentine daily La Nación, philosopher and writer Santiago Kovadloff summed up opposition sentiment about the government's use of "the law" to consolidate power: "The law has become a beloved tool of corruption," Mr. Kovadloff wrote. "The executive has put it at its service. It manipulates it with skill." And where does that leave society? "Insecurity is no longer a threat. We are in the jungle."

U.S. citizens should pay attention and make sure we don’t find ourselves in our own private jungle here. There are too many ways in which recent actions by politicians make this country feel too much like some Third World Country.