Follow the science? Well I don’t believe the science

By Dr. Harold A. Black

I read that if the US transitioned overnight to all-electric motor vehicles, the impact would be at most a 12 percent reduction of the earth’s carbon emissions. It would actually be much less given the negative environmental impacts of electric vehicles which may be more damaging to the environment than internal combustion engines (ICE). If true, then the war that the Biden Administration has been conducting on automobiles, fossil fuels, small engines, leaf blowers, weed eaters, gas furnaces, wood-fired ovens, light bulbs and all the rest will have a negligible effect on the environment. So to quote Stevie Wonder “What the Fuss?”

There is a large scientific literature – mostly suppressed – that finds that the world is not in imminent danger from changes in the climate. Many prominent scientific journals will not publish these studies and many funding sources will not fund research contrary to the climate change narrative. Since researchers are driven to publish for success and to acquire funding, they are motivated to cheat and falsify their findings in order to achieve the “correct” results. It has been reported elsewhere that over 60 percent of published empirical results may be compromised.

Part of the review process for submission to a journal entails peer review. The paper is sent out to one or two experts in the field to opine on the worthiness of publishing. Reviewers are apt to reject even a well-reasoned paper if the results fall contrary to what the reviewer believes. I have encountered this with several papers and ended up submitting to other journals in hopes of finding a sympathetic reviewer. Biases exist. I rejected a paper solely on the basis that although the author had cited several of my papers, my name appeared in the references as “African-American, Harold A.” I kid you not.

These falsifications are not merely of young assistant professors struggling to publish in the top journals to achieve tenure and promotion. It is also the most eminent scientists in the country. The climate director at Berkeley altered results in order to get a paper published. The president of Stanford recently resigned accused of falsifying data. Plagiarism has always been rife within academics (as well as politics, see Joe Biden).

The false reporting by scientists and other researchers and the rejection of contrary narratives were magnified by COVID. Many of the most cited studies of COVID were found to be false. COVID deaths were inflated. Dubious models predicted the end of the world and led governments to shut down the economy, and force vaccinations and masks on the public. Papers that questioned these models were refused publication and labeled “misinformation.”

I have conducted empirical research over a 40-year period. During that time, I have been an expert witness in cases where statistics are used by both sides to “prove” their arguments. Often I was on the opposite side of the government. Invariably, the government’s experts used incorrect models, or data, or statistical models to generate results favorable to the government. When I produced evidence demonstrating that my models, methods, data, et. al were more plausible, my side prevailed. We did not lose a single case to the government.

I have come to the point where I don’t necessarily believe what scientists purport to find unless I – or some disinterested third party – can corroborate the findings. I do not believe the CDC’s pronouncements or that from any agency in the current administration. Biden and his minions lie to us with a straight face, i.e., “the border is secure.” They know they are lying. We know they are lying. They know that we know that they are lying. But they do it anyway and their apologists simply make excuses.

I am not alone. Trust in the government is low perhaps because the public knows their officials are lying. It is becoming evident that the climate “crisis” may not be a real crisis and may be manufactured in order for governments to manipulate their constituents and exert control over them. Many businesses and individuals have become rich promoting their “inconvenient facts” about the climate and have their useful idiots who block highways, deface priceless art and spike trees. A recent study of glacial ice finds that from a historical standpoint, the planet is not warming. It is warming only from a particular point in recent history and still well below what has been the norm for the planet.

I’ve always said “Prove me wrong. If you do, I will adopt your view.” So my challenge to the environmental doom-and-gloomers, show me your evidence. Show me your models. Show me your data.