We’re About to Get a Global Worming
I tell you what. You can learn a lot about the increasing danger of mob-think from watching the global warming crowd.
They have no notion of basic scientific ethics. They don’t understand the importance of impartiality. They don’t understand the importance of free discourse, which is a nice way of saying they don’t understand the importance of not threatening and insulting every person who thinks they may be wrong.
I’m a scientist, technically. I have a BS in physics plus some grad school. I was not the world’s premier physicist, or I would have gone on to get my doctorate, but I have a basic grasp of the scientific method and the dangers of bias. These are things you learn about in grade school (maybe not, if you’re going to “school” now), but just to assure people that I have a clue, I went all the way to 25th grade or whatever it was, and I heard a little bit about scientific ethics and professionalism.
I’m also a lawyer. In law school, I was drilled pretty thoroughly on the importance of fairness and civility (at least in the courtroom). Lawyers are taught that certain evidence can be excluded based on its tendency to inflame emotion to the point where it counteracts reason. We are taught that certain hearsay evidence can be included if the emotional state of the speaker meets certain standards. We are taught that there are certain causes we can’t take up, because of conflicts of interest.
It may seem like conflation when I mention conflicts of interest and emotion in the same paragraph, but it’s not. In the law, conflicts of interest pervert justice, and emotion creates conflicts of interest. For that matter, conflicts of interest can give rise to emotion.
Either way, you end up with something on your mind, other than the truth.
This stuff is extremely important in the law. You can get in serious trouble for continuing in a representation when you have a conflict of interest. You can be forced off a case. It’s not trivial.
It’s also important in science.
Bias is so hard for scientists to avoid, we had to invent double-blind methods and endure the misery of statistics in order to try to drive the partiality out of our work.
Here I will tell the story of Clever Hans.
Clever Hans was a horse that supposedly did math. Its owner or trainer or whatever would ask it questions, and Hans would tap out the answers with its foot. Problem: it only worked with one person. When that person was out of the room, Hans lost his mathematical ability.
The reason? The person who worked with Hans was giving off unintentional cues. Hans was not really solving the quadratic equation; he was just banging his hoof when he saw the owner make an unconscious movement.
Now I will tell the story of M rays. I’m not sure M is the correct letter, but it will do.
Back when scientists were discovering a new form of radiation every week, a man said he had discovered M rays. Some people believed it. Some people didn’t. Naturally, the man who discovered M rays really wanted to believe it. Grants, jobs, whatever type of seductive groupies scientists attract…all that lay before him.
He put on a demonstration. He had some sort of apparatus, and he got an audience together. He turned on the machine, and voila…M rays.
Then a man in the crowd stood up and held up a part of the machine, which he had removed earlier. The machine could not work without it, but people’s imaginations could.
This is why we don’t go to the doctor for M rays today.
These are historical anecdotes, so they may be 95% false, but the principles they illustrate are true, and there are plenty of other examples.
The point I’m getting at is that people believe what they want to believe. This is why nine Supreme Court justices who were top-five in their classes can look at the same cases and draw two equally firm, completely incompatible opinions. And it’s why you usually don’t get three opinions. The division is usually conservative/liberal. The political spectrum has two wings, not five.
Liberals want to see a right to publicly funded sex changes in the Constitution, and conservatives don’t, and they see what they hope to see.
The global warming gang has no ethics. This applies to the lawyers, scientists, and engineers among them, not just the yoga instructors, welfare recipients, and medical marijuana addicts. They don’t understand the importance of free discourse.
Their favorite term for anyone who disagrees with them is “climate change denier.” The term itself is a breach of ethics. It comes from “Holocaust denier,” which comes from the discussion of neo-Nazis and Muslim extremists who pretend the Holocaust never happened. It comes from the discussion of rabid idiots who killed tens of millions of people. It equates scientific disagreement with claiming Dachau was a spa for fat Germans.
We shouldn’t have to have this discussion. Maybe the climate is changing, and maybe it’s our fault. Maybe the answer is more socialism and the crippling of industry in certain nations (USA cough cough). That doesn’t mean it’s okay to form lynch mobs and drive people out of their jobs for thinking otherwise.
You don’t have to be a moron to think climate change is a crock. Freeman Dyson agrees. William Gray agrees. But even if agreeing does reflect poorly on your intelligence, you should not have to deal with labels like “denier.” You should not have to worry about losing your job or having your academic credentials revoked.
When people are afraid to talk, science dies. It’s that simple.
The Soviets tried persecuting scientists (as did the Catholic church before them). A character named Lysenko came up with a bad theory of genetics that somehow seemed to support leftist notions, and the government got behind him. He said what they wanted to say! Amazingly, they agreed with him and helped him out. Who could have seen that coming?
Lysenko’s followers persecuted other scientists. This is probably why we don’t hear a lot about great Russian advances in genetics in that era.
Lysenko was such a big deal, a movement was named after him: “Lysenkoism.” Today it’s a synonym for persecution of scientific dissenters. In other words, it’s practically a synonym for “anthropogenic global warming.”
In Russia, scientists succeeded not because they discovered and disseminated truth, but because they pleased a bunch of fat murdering imbeciles in Moscow.
Today’s Lysenkoists see nothing wrong with what they’re doing. And it’s not subtle. It’s not like trying to measure the spin of tiny particles in a supercollider. It’s extremely obvious. It’s like going to church expecting to attend mass and finding pole dancers up at the altar.
Why is this interesting to me? I gave up science. Thank God for that, because had I not, look at the people whose boots would be on my neck right now. It’s interesting to me because it’s a measure of Satanic power of the mind of the mob.
People have more than enough brains to make good decisions about simple matters, but we screw up all the time, and often we screw up in huge waves. We screw up en masse, as though choreographed by an invisible George Balanchine. When that happens–when large numbers of people draw the same patently stupid conclusion simultaneously–the supernatural is at work. We’re stupid, but we need help to be that stupid.
People have a natural herd instinct, and it easily outweighs the mind. Probably ten billion psychology experiments have proven that. It’s why Goebbels said it was important to repeat lies. Satan whispers in the ears of the herd, and they have no resistance. The lie is supernatural, and in order to defeat it, the immune response has to be supernatural. People don’t hear from the Holy Spirit, so they don’t hear the response.
It’s okay to persecute people who disagree about weather. It’s okay to fire people and destroy their families because they won’t bake cakes for homosexuals. Bruce Jenner is a woman. A pervert who wants to display his genitals to your little girl in a locker room (or on the street in New York or San Francisco) is a victim, not a predator. These statements are obviously false, but the little Goebbels demons have been hard at work turning us into suckers, so we think they’re true. Worse than that, we think anyone who disagrees is evil. Not wrong. Evil.
So anything society does to people who disagree with the devil’s lies is okay.
When the Germans machine-gunned Jews beside ditches, they didn’t think they were doing something bad. They thought they were getting rid of wrong people. The Jews weren’t victims, and the object wasn’t to take the things they had earned. The Jews were subhuman monsters who were destroying Germany. Killing them was a good deed. It will be the same way when non-Christians and weak Christians start killing the Jews and strong Christians in America.
The Bible talks about people having veils over their eyes. It’s not a joke. It’s real. You can tell supernaturally deaf people the obvious truth all day, and they will never get it. They’ll just feel enraged.
It’s not that important whether the leftists cripple our economy with ridiculous environmental measures. It’s important, yes, but it’s not the big enchilada. What’s important is that we are seeing the sharp end of the nail. A few crazy ideas got past us, and now the point of the nail is past our defenses, and the shaft of the nail is right behind it. The shaft is bigger.
Man-made disasters start small and then take off. That’s what happened in Germany.
I don’t care that much whether the greenies force me to use terrible light bulbs, or whether they force me to pretend to recycle paper, which actually goes to the dump because no one will buy it. Things like that are going to happen, so I don’t want to get accustomed to having high blood pressure over it. I can’t stop it. They’re going to win big.
I do care about guarding the gates of my mind.
If you’re not praying in the Spirit, you will be susceptible to deception. If you can be deceived sufficiently, you can be turned. Then you have a real problem. The mark of the Beast won’t seem like such a bad idea. Denying God will seem like the smart move; you can always acknowledge him in private, and anyway, he knows your heart, right? You’ll rationalize and go along, and the first thing you know, you’ll be outside of God’s protection. You may lose your salvation, and then what do you have? Eternity in agony.
It seems like a paradox. Strong Christians will attract persecution, but you need to be strong when persecution comes. It’s not a paradox. They’re going to hate all Christians who have any sincerity in them at all. You will be hated one way or the other. But if you’re full of the fruit and the gifts of the Spirit, you’ll have more tools to help you bear it and win individual battles.
Things seem to be coming to a head faster than I expected. Technology is very close to destroying free will, which will negate God’s incentive to keep the world going. America has already been defeated by Satan, and if we elect the wrong people this time around, our problems may accelerate drastically. It may only be a couple of years before we’re just like the Jews under Hitler. I can’t see it taking longer than ten under the best circumstances, but I’m a pessimist. Maybe we can stretch it out.
I wouldn’t tell people to pray for God to spare America now. That bus has left the terminal. I would tell them to ask God to slow things down and help the humble prepare. I think that’s the best we can do.
I’m going to try to quit arguing with global warming adherents. It’s a complete waste of time as far as I can see. I learned a lot from it, but I’m pretty sure no minds were changed. After all, I was using natural tools.
Draw close to God. Ask him what you’re doing wrong. Pray in the Spirit all you can. Whatever happens will be a whole lot better than what would have happened had you done nothing.