Neil deGrasse Tyson: Elected Science Deniers Are a Threat to Democracy
Bill Nye, Barack Obama, and Neil DeGrasse Tyson selfie
Guest essay by Eric Worrall
Neil deGrasse Tyson has claimed that the refusal of the Trump administration to bow to every scientific demand presented to politicians is a threat to democracy.
Neil deGrasse Tyson says science deniers in White House are a profound threat to democracy
The scientist spoke out as thousands around the world prepare to march
One of America’s most influential and popular scientists has issued a stark warning over what he termed the Trump administration’s rejection of science – saying it is a threat to the country’s “informed democracy”.
Neil deGrasse Tyson, host of the StarTalk podcast and TV show and director of the Hayden Planetarium at the American Museum of Natural History, said when he grew up, the US had relied on science to drive its innovation. But no longer.
“People have lost the ability to judge what is true and what is not, what is reliable, what is not reliable,” he says in a video posted on Facebook. “That’s not the country I remember growing up in. I don’t remember any other time where people were standing in denial of what science was.”
…
In my opinion, the problem with people like Tyson is they think they have a monopoly on being right. And there are a lot of reasons for thinking Tyson is not right about everything.
Climate Science in particular has an atrocious track record of failed predictions, dating all the way back to James Hansen’s exaggerated Scenario A.
Bill Nye Freaks Out On CNN After Scientist Schools Him On Climate Change
…The Anti-Science ‘March for Science’: ‘Soviet-style central planning of economy in name of ‘saving’ Mother Earth
The latest sign-carrying, slogan-shouting, leftist mob to clog the streets of Washington, D.C. in a “march for science” is in reality a march against science.” These are the global warming nutcases, the overwhelming majority of whom have no education or credentials whatsoever in “science” of any kind. They are the useful idiots of the Democratic Party puppet stringpullers like George Soros, Hillary Clinton, John Podesta, etc. They want to “save the world” with huge carbon taxes that would skyrocket the prices of gasoline, electricity, natural gas, every product that utilizes petroleum products in its production, etc., which would be especially cruel to “the poor” whom they always claim to be speaking for.
Besides that, the premise of this latest leftist “march” is quintessentially anti-science. The science of global warming is “settled,” they say. That is the theme of the whole “march.” But to real scientists nothing is ever “settled” because most scientific studies are based on statistical analysis, and statistics is based on the study of probabilities. That’s why even your doctor is never 100% sure of most of the advice he or she gives you; his advice is based on probabilistic studies in the medical field that he learned of in medical school or in his continuing education. Furthermore, the world is constantly changing, so that statistical relationships that existed years ago are often vastly different today. In the field of economics, for example, the simplest of concepts — elasticity of demand — is studied by observing, historically, consumer demand responses to changes in prices. A particular relationship that held in the past (a 30% increase in purchases of a product for every 10% price cut, for example) says nothing about that same relationship in the future. New substitute or complementary products are constantly coming onto the market or leaving the market, which changes all of those relationships. Estimates of the elasticity of demand for a product or service do not “settle” anything, not to mentio far more complex economic relationships. The same is true of climate science and all other sciences.
Bloomberg urges world leaders to ignore Trump on climate
…New Climate Study Calls EPA’s Labeling Of CO2 A Pollutant ‘Totally False’
A new study published by seasoned researchers takes aim at the heart of the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) authority to issue regulations to curb carbon dioxide emissions.
The study claims to have “proven that it is all but certain that EPA’s basic claim that CO2 is a pollutant is totally false,” according to a press statement put out by Drs. Jim Wallace, John Christy and Joe D’Aleo.
Wallace, Christy and D’Aleo — a statistician, a climatologist and meteorologist, respectively — released a study claiming to invalidate EPA’s 2009 endangerment finding, which allowed the agency to regulate CO2 as a pollutant.
“This research failed to find that the steadily rising atmospheric CO2 concentrations have had a statistically significant impact on any of the 14 temperature data sets that were analyzed,” the authors say in the release for the second edition of their peer-reviewed work.
“Moreover, these research results clearly demonstrate that once the solar, volcanic and oceanic activity, that is, natural factor, impacts on temperature data are accounted for, there is no ‘record setting’ warming to be concerned about,” the researchers say. “In fact, there is no natural factor adjusted warming at all.”
The study is intended to bolster a petition Wallace and D’Aleo filed with EPA as part of the Household Electricity Consumers Council (CHECC), asking the agency to reconsider its endangerment finding.
The libertarian Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI) also filed a petition with EPA to reconsider the endangerment finding. The Trump administration has not indicated whether or not they will reconsider the Obama-era finding. Any challenge would be met with legal action from environmental activists.…
Research Report Disproves the Alarmists’ Basic Claims About CO2
This report and the earlier edition go far beyond this by disproving the alarmists’ basic claim that increases in atmospheric CO2 result in global warming. The Research Report results can be replicated using the basic data that the authors are willing to provide, most unlike the elaborate global climate models relied on by climate alarmists. Both the First and Second Editions have been extensively peer reviewed by experts in the relevant fields. So the reports have all the characteristics of good science, and should have the support of anyone who supports science, which the marchers claim to represent.
Climate skeptics have long argued that fluctuations in global temperatures are not primarily due to human-caused emissions of CO2 from using fossil fuels to improve their lives, and have generally attributed these fluctuations to changes in the sun, our source of heat and light. The importance of solar variations and other natural fluctuations has now been shown to be the case despite many tens of billions of taxpayer dollars spent by the US and other governments to try to disprove the obvious and mislead the public on this central scientific issue in the climate debate.…