Scientists + Politicians = Junk Science

Let's talk about a 

popular scientific theory, 

warning of a coming 

catastrophe.

The theory is supported by

leading scientists, politicians 

and celebrities.

Research is conducted 

at distinguished universities, 

funded by distinguished 

philanthropies.

Important research 

is done at Harvard, Yale, 

Stanford and Princeton.

The science is taught

in junior high school, 

high school, and college.

The science is supported by 

presidents, ex-presidents, 

Supreme Court justices, 

and Nobel Prize winners.

The science is supported by 

The National Academy of Sciences, 

The American Medical Association,

The National Research Council, 

and others.

Opponents of the theory 

are shouted down, 

and called ignorant.

Few people object to the theory.

This is a climate science 

(and climate politics) blog, 

so you must assume 

I'm talking about 

"climate change".

"Climate Change" 

stands for an

unproven belief 

of a coming 

global warming 

catastrophe.

The belief started 

in the late 1950's,

when I was about 

five years old.

I'm 65 year-old now.

There was no catastrophe.

Not even a small problem.

Winter nights are warmer

in Alaska -- but they are 

happy about that.

There was lots of junk science.

I confess that I tried to fool everyone. 

At the start of this article,

I was NOT actually talking 

about climate change !

I was describing another

form of junk science --

the theory of eugenics!

Eugenics theory claimed 

that "stupid" people 

were breeding faster 

than "smart" people, 

which was causing a 

catastrophic deterioration 

of the average intelligence 

of the human race !

Sadly, US scientists led the 

eugenics movement.

But German scientists 

fell for eugenics too, 

without being pressured 

by the Nazis telling them 

what to believe.

Eugenics theory led to German 

mental hospitals killing patients 

with poison gas, and then 

cremating them, 

allegedly to benefit 

the country.

That was  later expanded 

to killing millions of Jews, 

and other so-called 

"feeble-minded" people.    

But "feeble-minded" was never

clearly defined, and the definition

was stretched, to be applied to 

anyone who was different 

than the majority, 

such as immigrants, 

Jews, gays, blacks 

and gypsies.

After World War II, suddenly 

there were no eugenicists, 

nor would anyone even admit 

to having been a eugenicist 

prior to World War II.

Before World War II, 

eugenics supporters 

actually included:

  Teddy Roosevelt,

Woodrow Wilson, 

  Winston Churchill,

Oliver Wendel Holmes,

  Louis Brandeis,

Alexander Graham Bell,

  Margret Sanger,

Luther Burbank,

  H. G. Wells,

George Bernard Shaw,

  The Carnegie foundation, 

The Rockefeller Foundation,

  and many others. 

When people tell me 

rising CO2 levels 

must be dangerous, 

because politicians and 

government bureaucrat 

climate scientists say so,

I respond 
by telling them

almost every 
'science consensus' 

in history, was 
later proven wrong.

And then I tell them about 

the junk science of eugenics.

I've read about climate change 

as a hobby, since 1997, and 

I am 100% confident the claim

that CO2 controls the climate

is junk science, and the claim 

that the future climate can be 

predicted by merely estimating

future CO2 levels is a hoax,

proven wrong by 30 years

of very wrong computer model 

climate predictions.

Most important is that we 

have 78 years of experience

with significant additions

of man made CO2 to the 

atmosphere, starting after

the Great Depression.

In some decades 

since then,

the average

temperature

went down: 

( 1940 to 1975 ),

In other decades 

the average 
temperature 

went up:

( 1975 to 2003 )

And recently,

the average 
temperature 

stayed the same:

( 2003 to 2018 ).

There were three different

relationships between CO2 

and average temperature

in the past 78 years -- 

meaning climate science 

is far from being "settled".

Leftists calling CO2 an 

"existential threat",

and then character 

attacking anyone who 

disagrees, are acting 

like climate fascists.

In my 21 years of reading 

climate science, as a hobby,

I have yet to identify anyone

hurt by climate change.

Where is a list ?

The liars, who claim CO2

is "pollution", will completely 

ignore the real pollution 

in Chinese and Indian cities.

Why do they look the other way ?

Simply because 

"climate change" 

is about leftists 

scaring people,

with junk science,

to gain political power,

not about helping people,

by reducing real pollution !