OK, so we here at The Objective Observer are still on this King Biden divine proclamation to “follow the science”. If you haven’t been paying attention, King Biden‘s proclamation states the following:
“science, facts, and evidence are vital to addressing policy and programmatic issues across the
Federal Government monarchy.”
But we have some problems with the ordained king’s proclamation here at The Objective Observer. It’s not that we do not believe in science, but rather that we don’t believe in blindly following the science. But before we get to that, perhaps more importantly, the proclamation as stated is a complete and utter fraud. A more accurate proclamation would read:
“science, facts, and evidence that we agree with and support our pre-determined views are vital to addressing policy and programmatic issues across the
Federal Government monarchy.”
As we pointed out in Following the Science, King Biden is cherry picking science that supports his pre-determined views while ignoring other legitimate science that does not. But that’s not how science is supposed to work. Of course, King Biden will justify his approach by pointing to “consensus” science. The problem with this approach, as we have repeatedly pointed out in The Climate Change Heresies, Higgs Bozos, There Are No Climate Change Deniers and even Flying Spaghetti Monster Theory, is that “consensus” science, and in particular “consensus” science in young fields of study, tends to get things wrong. And not just wrong, but spectacularly wrong. Consider that the following have all been “consensus” science until relatively recently:
- Until the 1890’s consensus science was that atoms were indivisible. The atomic bomb tells us otherwise.
- Until 1911, consensus science was that atoms adhered to a “plum pudding model” versus a nuclear model. Incorrect, it’s the nuclear model.
- Prior to Einstein’s general theory of relativity in 1915, a magical “luminiferous aether” was considered by scientific consensus as the medium for the propagation of light. Einstein was actually still trying to work the aether into the theory of relativity as late as 1924.
- Prior to the 1970’s, the scientific consensus for macro geologic processes was not plate tectonics. Guess what? It’s plate tectonics.
- Prior to the 1980’s, scientific consensus would tell you that sauropods lived in lakes and that dinosaurs were cold blooded and extinct. We now understand these things to be entirely false.
- Up until 1982 consensus science was that crystalline solids could only be composed of repeating blocks. This was disproved by the discovery of Quasicrystals.
- Until May 17th, 1990 the consensus science from the American Psychiatric Association and the World Health Organization (WHO) classified homosexuality as a “mental illness”. Clearly, that is not the case.
So had King Biden ascended to the throne the first time he tried in 1988, would King Biden have institutionalized homosexuals because he was “following the science”? Aren’t homosexuals lucky that unscientific “buffoons” like Reagan and Bush were ruling instead.
But surely, these are all “old” examples from at least 30 years ago. Surely “modern” science never gets things wrong. Well, actually, it is well understood that science gets things wrong all the time. In fact, a statistician has recently demonstrated that most published research findings are false. And, even more recently we have the following:
- Dark matter may not actually exist – and our alternative theory can be put to the test (phys.org)
- Space news: ‘Dark matter’ may not exist after all, new research suggests | 7NEWS.com.au
- Maybe ‘dark matter’ doesn’t exist after all, new research suggests (nbcnews.com)
That’s right, those last two articles are from January 6th and January 7th, 2021. And yet for at least the last 30 years “consensus” science was that 85% of the universe was made up of “dark matter”. So, if King Biden was planning on basing any policy decisions on dark matter “consensus” science, he would be basing policy on something that likely doesn’t even exist.
The point of all of this is that proclaiming that one’s administration will be based on science, facts and evidence runs the real risk of basing policy on things that are 100% incorrect and wrong. But declaring the monarchy to be “science based” was really never the purpose of that proclamation. The real purpose of that proclamation was to silence critics of King Biden‘s already pre-determined policies which were never really based upon all of the science to begin with. The proclamation is really intended to be used as a cudgel to beat critics of the current monarchy’s policies over the head and brand them “science deniers” the same way climate change proponents denounce critics as “climate change deniers”. And no, the phrasing to evoke the idea of a “Holocaust denier” is no accident. The move is so chilling and diabolical that every scientist in the country should be outraged and crying out at the top of their lungs to denounce that proclamation, denounce the political weaponization of science itself.
One thought on “When Science is Wrong”