In an important paper published on Ecoworld, Robert Lindzen, Professor of Atmospheric Science at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, takes stock of scientific misconduct with regard to climate hysteria: Climate Science: Is It Currently Designed To Answer Questions?
[W]hat historians will definitely wonder about in future centuries is how deeply flawed logic, obscured by shrewd and unrelenting propaganda, actually enabled a coalition of powerful special interests to convince nearly everyone in the world that CO2 from human industry was a dangerous, planet destroying toxin. It will be remembered as the greatest mass delusion in the history of the world – that CO2, the life of plants, was considered for a time to be a deadly poison.
The introduction puts it in somewhat dry, scientific language, but the message is clear:
This paper will deal with the origin of the cultural changes and with specific examples of the operation and interaction of these factors. In particular, we will show how political bodies act to control scientific institutions, how scientists adjust both data and even theory to accommodate politically correct positions, and how opposition to these positions is disposed of.
I.e. this paper will deal with the manner in which the scientific principles of reasoned and rational formulation and testing of theories were finished off by political activists dressed up as scientists.
It’s a hugely interesting paper (if you have a little time to kill) and it pretty much exposes the Climate Change Hype (CCH) for what it is: A world-wide fraud. Along the way it illustrates why post-modernism is the death of the rational process we’ve come to know as the scientific method: It sanctions fraud. For where there is no truth, there is no lie.
Towards the end of the paper, Lindzen warns of science trivializing itself in the eyes of society as a whole:
Although society is undoubtedly aware of the imperfections of science, it has rarely encountered a situation such as the current global warming hysteria where institutional science has so thoroughly committed itself to policies which call for massive sacrifices in well being world wide. Past scientific errors did not lead the public to discard the view that science on the whole was a valuable effort. However, the extraordinarily shallow basis for the commitment to climate catastrophe, and the widespread tendency of scientists to use unscientific means to arouse the public’s concerns, is becoming increasingly evident, and the result could be a reversal of the trust that arose from the triumphs of science and technology during the World War II period. Further, the reliance by the scientific community on fear as a basis for support, may, indeed, have severely degraded the ability of science to usefully address problems that need addressing.
Irrespective of the glum title of this post, there is some sliver of light in this big mess: The fact that the Lindzen paper came out at all (and is receiving ample attention, at least in the blogosphere) may signal some much needed and long overdue introspection by those caught up in the hysteria. And maybe, just maybe, we can return to a more rational, value free Popperian model of science, instead of ‘post-normal’ science (that cheap and lying term for a political diktat) propagated by the climate hysterics.