The left’s all-out assault on science
The left and the Democrats are amazingly good at marketing.
For example—for the entire history of the United States of America, they were the malefactors of civil rights. Slavery, segregation, Jim Crow, Dred Scott, the KKK, opposition to anti-lynching legislation, Plessy, opposition to every piece of civil rights legislation (including, in large measure, in 1964 and ’65) . . . not to mention things like Korematsu and the Palmer Raids—all the Democrats. And yet they have managed to project the sin of racism on their opponents very effectively.
The same thing goes for their supposed reverence for science. Granted, they have an easy target in young-earth creationists, and they use that to full advantage. But that’s largely a straw man, and on a whole host of real issues that ACTUALLY PERTAIN TO OUR LIVES, they abuse science terribly. And yet they regularly project that sin onto their opponents, and claim the mantle of reverence for “science” for themselves.
Here are just a few examples of their ongoing mendacity.
Well-meaning laws sometimes backfire. That’s especially true when they are passed in reaction to media frenzies driven by ideology rather than science. And that’s what’s happening in the United States and Europe, where advocacy groups are raising new alarms about bisphenol A (aka BPA), a controversial plastic component used to prevent spoilage in myriad products, including containers, dental sealants, and epoxy linings.
On Tuesday, the California State Senate approved a ban on baby bottles and sippy cups that contain BPA, with the measure now going to the Assembly for a final vote. Set to take effect next July, the ban was approved despite the fact that no governmental science-based advisory board in the world has concluded that BPA is harmful.
But political systems often operate with limited information and short time horizons, while much of science is complex and evolving. Bowing to relentless campaigns, restrictions on BPA used in baby bottles have been imposed politically in 11 states and in a few countries, such as France and Canada. KEEP READING
Granted, the science isn’t totally settled . . . which is why they should wait until it is before upending the apple cart! But they never wait.
Next, we have the spectacle of a scientist who used false data to fuel the hype on “catastrophic” man-made global warming trying to seek special exemption from the law to cover his tracks:
Dr. Michael Mann, lead author of the discredited “hockey stick” graph that was once hailed by the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change as the “smoking gun” of the catastrophic man-made global warming theory, has asked to intervene in American Tradition Institute’s Freedom of Information Act lawsuit that seeks certain records produced by Mann and others while he was at the University of Virginia, for the purpose of keeping them hidden from the taxpayer.
Specifically over the weekend ATI’s Environmental Law Center received service from two Pennsylvania attorneys who seek the court’s permission to argue for Dr. Mann to intervene in ATI’s case. The attorneys also filed a motion to stay production of documents still withheld by UVA, which are to be provided to ATI’s lawyers in roughly two weeks under a protective order that UVA voluntarily agreed to in May. Dr. Mann’s lawyers also desire a hearing in mid-September, in an effort to further delay UVA’s scheduled production of records under the order.
Dr. Mann’s argument, distilled, is that the court must bend the rules to allow him to block implementation of a transparency law, so as to shield his sensibilities from offense once the taxpayer – on whose dime he subsists – sees the methods he employed to advance the global warming theory and related policies. ATI’s Environmental Law Center is not sympathetic. KEEP READING
Not do the rules of science not apply to Mann, apparently, neither does the rule of law.
This cancer spread into government long ago, and with the advent of the Obama Administration, it has severely metastasized:
According to the R-CALF release, Mike Callicrate, after presenting information on country of origin labeling at R-CALF’s annual convention last week, was asked whether the EPA has declared hay a pollutant. He indicated that in his case at least, they have. “Now that EPA has declared hay a pollutant, every farmer and rancher that stores hay, or that leaves a broken hay bale in the field is potentially violating EPA rules and subject to an EPA enforcement action,” Callicrate said. “How far are we going to let this agency go before we stand up and do something about it?” read the whole thing
These are just three examples. There are literally hundreds more. Bad science. Bad law. Bad scientists thinking they’re above the law. False data. Coverups.
But they are the people who are on the side of science. Yeah.