{"id":1439563,"date":"2022-04-15T07:44:57","date_gmt":"2022-04-15T11:44:57","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/?p=1439563"},"modified":"2022-04-15T07:45:02","modified_gmt":"2022-04-15T11:45:02","slug":"everything-wrong-with-covid-science-has-been-wrong-with-climate-science-for-longer","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/everything-wrong-with-covid-science-has-been-wrong-with-climate-science-for-longer\/","title":{"rendered":"Everything Wrong With COVID \u201cScience\u201d Has Been Wrong With Climate Science for Longer"},"content":{"rendered":"<aside class=\"mashsb-container mashsb-main mashsb-stretched\"><div class=\"mashsb-box\"><div class=\"mashsb-count mash-medium\" style=\"&quot;\"><div class=\"counts mashsbcount\">26<\/div><span class=\"mashsb-sharetext\">SHARES<\/span><\/div><div class=\"mashsb-buttons\"><a class=\"mashicon-facebook mash-medium mash-nomargin mashsb-noshadow\" href=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/sharer.php?u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservativenewsdaily.net%2Fbreaking-news%2Feverything-wrong-with-covid-science-has-been-wrong-with-climate-science-for-longer%2F\" target=\"_top\" rel=\"nofollow\"><span class=\"icon\"><\/span><span class=\"text\">Facebook<\/span><\/a><a class=\"mashicon-twitter mash-medium mash-nomargin mashsb-noshadow\" href=\"https:\/\/twitter.com\/intent\/tweet?text=&amp;url=https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/?p=1439563&amp;via=ConservNewsDly\" target=\"_top\" rel=\"nofollow\"><span class=\"icon\"><\/span><span class=\"text\">Twitter<\/span><\/a><a class=\"mashicon-subscribe mash-medium mash-nomargin mashsb-noshadow\" href=\"#\" target=\"_top\" rel=\"nofollow\"><span class=\"icon\"><\/span><span class=\"text\">Subscribe<\/span><\/a><div class=\"onoffswitch2 mash-medium mashsb-noshadow\" style=\"display:none\"><\/div><\/div>\n            <\/div>\n                <div style=\"clear:both\"><\/div><\/aside>\n            <!-- Share buttons by mashshare.net - Version: 4.0.47--><p>There\u2019s no question that COVID presented a tremendous challenge for scientists. We\u2019re talking about a pandemic that took the world by storm, was killing large numbers of people, and initially, we had very few answers to the questions that mattered most.<\/p>\n<p>Who was most vulnerable? Did masks prevent COVID? Could you get it from touching things an infected person had touched? Why did some people get extremely sick while others weren\u2019t impacted? What are the best ways to treat people with COVID? Was it safe for people to congregate outside? Could masks shut down COVID? Why did some people get long-term COVID while others didn\u2019t? Was the virus man-made or naturally occurring? What was the best way to keep the population safe while minimally disrupting our society?<\/p>\n<p>Two years out from the virus, we STILL don\u2019t have the answers to many of those questions and that shouldn\u2019t surprise anyone. Science is often a laborious and messy process that can take years of competing experiments to produce answers to the questions it sets out to answer \u2013 if it ever does. For example, what could be more basic than the food we eat? Yet, there is no definitive answer on what foods we should eat to be healthy. Certainly, there are some strong indications about what foods we SHOULDN\u2019T eat (seed oils, sugar, highly processed foods, and fried foods), but should you go vegetarian? Vegan? Carnivore? Paleo? Proponents of all those foods can make excellent arguments, backed by scientific studies, that their way of eating is the best. Even though it\u2019s an extremely important question, it\u2019s impossible to say with certainty at this point.<\/p>\n<p>Scientists studying COVID were faced with that same dilemma. People were DYING and looking to them for answers that they simply didn\u2019t have. So, in many cases, they took their best guesses. That\u2019s not an unreasonable way to approach the situation as long as everyone is being honest about what\u2019s happening.<\/p>\n<p>In other words, it\u2019s perfectly fine to say, \u201cWe\u2019re consulting with some of the best people in the field and we can tell you that based on the limited research we have, this is what we think the best way to go seems to be. That being said, it may change in the future as we get better data.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>The problem with taking that approach is that people, especially when it comes to their health, prefer to hear definite answers. That goes double when you\u2019re talking about something they may be reluctant to do, like take a brand-new vaccine, wear masks that they find annoying, or shut down their businesses.<\/p>\n<p>So, what happened with COVID when the scientists wanted to steer the public towards what their \u201cbest guesses\u201d were about how to handle the pandemic? They made claims they couldn\u2019t back up and called it \u201cscience.\u201d Then, they encouraged censorship of people who pointed out their lies. They waived off all doubt and proclaimed that questioning their views, many of which were politically motivated, was the same as questioning science itself. What was it that <a href=\"https:\/\/nypost.com\/2021\/06\/09\/fauci-says-attacks-on-him-are-attacks-on-science\/\" rel=\"\">Anthony Fauci<\/a> said when he was criticized?<\/p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>\u201cA lot of what you\u2019re seeing as attacks on me quite frankly are attacks on science.&#8221;<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<p>That was the attitude from the get-go. As if questioning the conclusions and tactics used to fight COVID was the equivalent of questioning whether gravity existed or whether the Earth was round. It was a mixture of science AND political activism. Also, as you\u2019d expect, it was often wrong. Actually, masking the general public didn\u2019t stop COVID. COVID doesn\u2019t appear to spread very well by touch. We aren\u2019t seeing very much transmission of COVID outdoors. The vaccines did save a lot of lives, but no, they weren\u2019t anywhere near as effective at stopping people from getting the virus as advertised. Lockdowns were a disastrously bad idea. At this point, it\u2019s also abundantly clear that firing people for not being vaccinated makes no rational sense. For that matter, vaccinating healthy children clearly makes no sense, but we\u2019re doing it anyway.<\/p>\n<p>Now, if all of this had been done THE RIGHT WAY, with genuine open debate, SOME of the same mistakes would have been made. However, we also would have avoided a lot of mistakes. Would we have had lockdowns? Maybe, but if so, we can be sure the lockdowns wouldn\u2019t have lasted as long in some parts of the country. There\u2019s absolutely no chance we would have been demanding that people be fired for not taking a vaccine that doesn\u2019t prevent people from getting COVID. Additionally, things like masking and vaccinating healthy children seem to be almost completely politically driven. It\u2019s hard to imagine a free and open scientific debate leading to healthy children being vaccinated. On top of all this, the public wouldn\u2019t have lost faith in what they hear from so many \u201cscientists.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Science is still respected by the public, but there\u2019s now an element of doubt about scientists telling the public the truth that really wasn\u2019t present before. Overall, that will hurt our society and science itself in the long run, but it is at least likely to have the advantage of opening many people\u2019s eyes to the extraordinarily sketchy \u201cscience\u201d involved in global warming.<\/p>\n<p>First of all, keep in mind that we think the earth is 4.5 BILLION \u2013 yes, with a \u201cb\u201d \u2013 years old. Additionally, our best guess is that humans evolved 200,000 to 300,000 years ago. Out of all that time, do you know long we\u2019ve had actual global temperature readings we can look back at? Only <a href=\"https:\/\/qz.com\/1055629\/why-does-all-our-climate-data-start-in-1880\/\" rel=\"\">142 years<\/a>:<\/p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>People have been measuring temperature since Galileo\u2019s time, and the modern thermometer was invented in the early 1700s. Formal weather stations, which before the mid-1800s were mostly in Europe and the US, became ubiquitous enough by 1880 to provide a robust picture of global temperature. But the vast majority of other, older climate data still isn\u2019t digitized.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<p>When people say things like, \u201cThis is the hottest year on record,\u201d they mean since 1880. Additionally, there are certainly reasonable questions that can be asked about how accurate that data is over time. Things like cities, factories, and roads can drive up the temperature in an area. Is it really getting hotter in some of these areas, or did they go from an isolated region to a populated one?<\/p>\n<p>Of course, scientists do have different ways of measuring temperature further back than 1880 but <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scienceabc.com\/eyeopeners\/how-do-we-know-the-temperature-on-earth-millions-of-years-ago.html\" rel=\"\">calling them \u201cquestionable\u201d would be a compliment<\/a>:<\/p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>Some common examples of climate proxies are rocks, ice cores, tree rings, fossils, lake, and sea sediments etc. They act as \u201cnatural climatic archives\u201d as they contain imprints of the ambient temperature conditions on them.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<p>We can speculate that these methods might be accurate, but of course, until someone invents a time machine, there\u2019s no way to go back in time and figure out if they\u2019re right or not. In other words, much of our data before 1880 is little more than ultimately unverifiable educated guesses.<\/p>\n<p>On top of all that, just as we\u2019ve seen with COVID, this issue has been heavily politicized and the scientific debate around it has been stifled. The amount of money that\u2019s pouring into the field, not for an open scientific debate, but to promote the pro-manmade global warming point of view, <a href=\"https:\/\/www.heritage.org\/environment\/commentary\/follow-the-climate-change-money\" rel=\"\">is so huge it\u2019s almost beyond belief<\/a>:<\/p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>According to a recent report by the U.S. Government Accountability Office, \u201cFederal funding for climate change research, technology, international assistance, and adaptation has increased from $2.4 billion in 1993 to $11.6 billion in 2014, with an additional $26.1 billion for climate change programs and activities provided by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act in 2009.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>&#8230;How big is the Climate Change Industrial Complex today? Surprisingly, no one seems to be keeping track of all the channels of funding. A few years ago, Forbes magazine went through the federal budget and estimated about $150 billion in spending on climate change and green energy subsidies during President Obama\u2019s first term.<\/p>\n<p>&#8230;Worldwide the numbers are gargantuan. Five years ago, a leftist group called the Climate Policy Initiative issued a study which found that \u201cGlobal investment in climate change\u201d reached $359 billion that year.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<p>The whole global warming industry is a gravy train \u2013 as long as you say what the people doling out the money want to hear. If scientists that worked for the tobacco industry told you that smoking cigarettes is the healthiest thing you can do, no one in their right mind would take that at face value. Despite protests you may hear to the contrary, this is no different.<\/p>\n<p>It\u2019s also well worth noting that the United States is not even the world\u2019s leading producer of greenhouse gases. <a href=\"https:\/\/www.epa.gov\/ghgemissions\/global-greenhouse-gas-emissions-data\" rel=\"\">Per the EPA<\/a>:<\/p>\n<div class=\"captioned-image-container\">\n<figure><a class=\"image-link image2\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"nofollow noopener\" href=\"https:\/\/cdn.substack.com\/image\/fetch\/f_auto,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep\/https%3A%2F%2Fbucketeer-e05bbc84-baa3-437e-9518-adb32be77984.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2F38b91671-2c95-45e3-b4e2-f4839ffb17ae_336x348.png\"><source type=\"image\/webp\" \/><img src width=\"336\" height=\"348\" data-attrs=\"{\" \/><\/a><\/figure>\n<\/div>\n<p>What this means is that even if we went down the crazy Left\u2019s entire wish list on this issue and banned gasoline-powered engines, ended domestic air flights, and got rid of those awful farting cows, it ultimately wouldn\u2019t fix any kind of global problem. In other words, even if global warming were real, caused by man, and was guaranteed to lead to disaster, the only realistic potential solution would be geoengineering projects. <a href=\"https:\/\/www.politifact.com\/factchecks\/2022\/feb\/25\/facebook-posts\/claim-bill-gates-scheming-block-sun-wrong\/\" rel=\"\">Here\u2019s one recent example of a potential technique that\u2019s being studied<\/a>:<\/p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>&#8220;Geoengineering is a blanket term for technologies that try to alter Earth\u2019s physical qualities on the largest scale possible,&#8221; Popular Mechanics reported. &#8220;One example is cloud seeding, where airplanes flush clouds with particulate matter in order to coalesce into rain.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p>Solar geoengineering involves using technology to try to reflect solar radiation back into space before it can interact with greenhouse gases. The most commonly proposed method is to use aerosols \u2014 &#8220;the gaseous clouds formed by particles of many common materials&#8221; \u2014 because the physical structure of their particles blocks and scatters light, according to Popular Mechanics.<\/p>\n<p>But solar geoengineering is controversial, even according to the Harvard researchers who proposed the experiment. For one thing, the methods could have unintended consequences on global weather patterns.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<p>Put another way, we have a fairly primitive understanding of our climate and we\u2019re terrified we might cause some kind of cataclysm by messing around with the climate on a global scale. That\u2019s a wise approach to take given our current knowledge level. We can\u2019t tell you definitively if it will rain tomorrow. We can\u2019t predict exactly where a hurricane is going. We certainly don\u2019t know enough to try to change the world climate and while we\u2019re at it, anyone who\u2019s honest would admit that there\u2019s not a living soul on this planet who has any idea what the global climate is going to look like in 100 years.<\/p>\n<p>With COVID, we got to see this kind of bogus science fail in real-time, but with global warming, we just get to see <a href=\"https:\/\/nypost.com\/2021\/11\/12\/50-years-of-predictions-that-the-climate-apocalypse-is-nigh\/\" rel=\"\">new predictions of doom fail every few years<\/a>. Rather than hitting us with more PR campaigns featuring sad polar bears, maybe they should try getting back to real science. Start funding the skeptics. Open up scientific debate. Take politics out of the equation and allow people to go where their research leads them, not to predetermined answers. That\u2019s what people who care about science would do. On the other hand, if it\u2019s really all about \u201cscience\u201d masquerading as a political agenda, nothing needs to change at all.<\/p>\n<p class=\"button-wrapper\" data-attrs=\"{\" url><a class=\"button primary\" href=\"https:\/\/www.culturcidal.com\/p\/everything-wrong-with-covid-science?utm_source=substack&#038;utm_medium=email&#038;utm_content=share&#038;action=share\" rel=\"\"><span>Share<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n<p class=\"button-wrapper\" data-attrs=\"{\" url><a class=\"button primary\" href=\"https:\/\/www.culturcidal.com\/p\/everything-wrong-with-covid-science\/comments\" rel=\"\"><span>Leave a comment<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n<p class=\"button-wrapper\" data-attrs=\"{\" url><a class=\"button primary\" href=\"https:\/\/amzn.to\/3rrtHxH\" rel=\"\"><span>101 Things All Young Adults Should Know<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>There\u2019s no question that COVID presented a tremendous challenge for scientists. We\u2019re talking about a pandemic that took the world by storm, was killing large numbers of people, and initially,<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":498,"featured_media":2315279,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_mo_disable_npp":"","fifu_image_url":"","fifu_image_alt":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1439563","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1439563","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/498"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1439563"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1439563\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/2315279"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1439563"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1439563"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1439563"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}