Be skeptical. Be very skeptical.

Faith in science? Why skepticism is rising


suggests that it’s the increasing use of science as ammunition for big-government schemes that has led to more skepticism.

Murdoc thinks that the methods used in environmental scaremongering (especially Global Warming) have pretty much torpedoed any hope that a rational scientific approach to the issue is possible.

Meanwhile: EPA Backpedals on Fracking Contamination

The Environmental Protection Agency has dropped its claim that an energy company contaminated drinking water in Texas, the third time in recent months that the agency has backtracked on high-profile local allegations linking natural-gas drilling and water pollution.


  1. I am skeptical of these so called ‘skeptics’…as they act like contrarians; which is not the same thing.

    I have an alternative theory: Scientists aren’t trained to talk to the public. They aren’t generally dishonest…they’re just dorks. Against the onslaught of a dedicated propaganda machine they are helpless; as their factual findings only matter in the long term.

    A Message From a Republican Meteorologist on Climate Change.
    I am a moderate Republican, fiscally conservative; a fan of small government, accountability, self-empowerment, and sound science. I am not a climate scientist. I’m a meteorologist, and the weather maps I’m staring at are making me uncomfortable. No, you’re not imagining it: we’ve clicked into a new and almost foreign weather pattern. To complicate matters, I’m in a small, frustrated and endangered minority: a Republican deeply concerned about the environmental sacrifices some are asking us to make to keep our economy powered-up, long-term. It’s ironic.

    The root of the word conservative is “conserve.” A staunch Republican, Teddy Roosevelt, set aside vast swaths of America for our National Parks System, the envy of the world. Another Republican, Richard Nixon, launched the EPA. Now some in my party believe the EPA and all those silly “global warming alarmists” are going to get in the way of drilling and mining our way to prosperity. Well, we have good reason to be alarmed.

    1. As noted

      the increasing use of science as ammunition for big-government schemes that has led to more skepticism.

      That has nothing to do with dorkiness or inability to speak well. And I heartily agree that scientists “aren’t generally dishonest,” but when some are dishonest about big things it strengthens the skepticism greatly.

      1. I disagree. The scientists are not so much being dishonest, as they are being perceived as being dishonest due to an aggressive narrative being pushed by certain powerful lobbyists; for whom any kind of change away from the status quo is not acceptable, even if it leads to the doom of human civilization.

        Science is not real ammunition for big/small government, Lobbyist cash is. Cash is King. Always has been.

        1. Well, I stated that I agreed scientists “aren’t generally dishonest” but that some some sometimes were about big things.

          If you’re disagreeing about some scientists sometimes being dishonest, I have no idea what planet’s scientists you’re talking about.

          And as far as cash being king, don’t pretend that some scientists are not sometimes swayed by the pursuit of the dollar.

          1. As I hear/read it, the vast majority of the actual fraud in the sciences surrounds medicinals and bio-patents; climate science can’t really patent anything nor have much of any ‘thing’ which can be sold, and so is not plagued by fraud…at least not by the working climate scientists.

            As a rule of thumb among the sciences, if a researcher want’s to get rich, don’t work for a university nor the government; work instead for private industry. (not as intellectually rewarding, but you earn above median wage early on.

  2. Related new article from NYT:
    Apri 16th
    A Sharp Rise in Retractions Prompts Calls for Reform
    “But critics like Dr. Fang and Dr. Casadevall argue that science has changed in some worrying ways in recent decades — especially biomedical research, which consumes a larger and larger share of government science spending.”
    It’s got a paywall so I don’t know if the link will work:

Comments are closed