Originally published on Quantumalot.
By now you’ve read the news that the IPCC says that the collapse of the global civilization is imminent. I warn you: Do not succumb to their spin.
Scientists’ claims about the anthropogenic global warming theory are constantly bolstered by statisticians. The process is known as median corroboration. It essentially means that a statistician is asked about a certain hypothesis, and he or she agrees or disagrees with the scientists. You do this very well at home and think we’re amazing—right! Well, perhaps your thinking about statistics is biased.
Quantitative science has been winning the war against “false consciousness.” But that war is far from over.
Scientists—and their religion-like disciples—need to be aware that they may get swamped by establishment propaganda. Any time you hear scientists involved in radical climate change theory try to explain away the alarming data, do not be fooled. It is not pure research. It is a major media-driven, propaganda-driven scare that is designed to prevent the public from recognizing the tragedy of the commons.
Philip Ball, John Christy, Gavin Schmidt, Fred Singer, Donald Kettl, Michael Mann, Geert Jan van Oldenborgh, Timothy Ball, Juan Fernández, Guillermo Cano—you think we’re really the mean-witted rogues that we are? Sorry, we aren’t stupid. We’re not.
The scientific community is obsessed with using statistics to reinforce the “see, feel, live, experience” philosophy behind the theory of global warming. Statistics about how much CO2 dioxide is in the atmosphere are, therefore, seen by a society that sees CO2 emissions and ocean acidification as a “concern” as a way to implement a much-needed environmental policy.
There are some pretty doozies, too. Attempts to connect CO2 emissions with the air-speed records of planes, for example, or the accuracy of climate models are designed to reinforce the myth of global warming and the unsubstantiated theory of anthropogenic global warming. The conversation about technological and scientific breakthroughs for the betterment of mankind inevitably ends up being linked to the theory of anthropogenic global warming.
In spite of climate disasters and the total denial of climate scientists, there is a core of people who consistently find a new reason to ignore the evidence to the contrary.
Climate scientists and their religion-like followers have been using statistical arguments (“experts”) to justify the irresponsible and dangerous decisions made by politicians and policymakers. Numbers can easily be twisted by a person or group that favors an emotionally-charged topic—that’s why it’s imperative to look beyond the statistical structure to verify any story or statement.