Thursday, January 26, 2017

Rogue Scientists

Censorship begets a backlash:
Steve Gorman. U.S. government scientists go 'rogue' in defiance of Trump. Reuters, January 26, 2017,


  1. Money has taken over science. The degree to which this has happened is really staggering--though more in some areas than others. Climate science and medical science are probably the worst.
    Practically all prescription medications have contraindications that are scary. Psychiatric medications are definitely a medical hoax based on the non scientific idea of chemical imbalance and brain scans that mean nothing. A complete scam.
    As for climate science its attempt to derogate the role of the sun in climate is now backfiring by its failing to cooperate with their failed predictions. Greenland is really loading on the ice and snow this year. The fudging with temperatures is a scandal. But most like the money. The notion started in the 1970's by non scientists with political and economic motives. Carbon tax among them. Al Gore helped to make the idea hip. Etc. Unfortunately the corruption has slithered into most areas of science to some degree.
    That leaves mathematics and languages as the only safe areas of study for students. To make this all a little more personal a NOAA scientist and his family lived next door to us in the 1990's. After he cheated my nine year old daughter out of some baby sitting money we closed our door to them! Arrogance rather than a genuine search for truth is the current motivation.
    Hard not to rant on this topic. Better stop here or I will be mistaken for Anonymous!

  2. Stanford University is probably as good a university as exists anywhere; and no doubt earthquakes get plenty of attention there. I get the Stanford alumni magazine six times a year. I glance through it and no longer wonder when an issue will be devoted to radiation and Fukushima. That would be a little too close for comfort given the university's proximity to the Pacific. Well, I still buy tuna. I imagine there are scientists there who are quite focused on what Fukushima has done to the sea--but they are keeping it close to their vests or sweaters or whatever they wear. Almost six years now and really no one place for reliable scientific material covering the biological consequences. Is Hawaii in danger? Alaska? What kind of danger? Californians, at least some, want to quit the USA. They might in the years to come really drag down American life expectancy and greatly raise medical insurance costs.
    I suppose it could still export films. But who would want its food? Japan and China probably . . . Six years and not much in the way of a collected scientific analysis; not mentioned during the election cycle. Maybe agreeing with those who consider it a solved problem is best? Consensus reality triumphing over the other reality. What can't be cured must be endured.

    1. The country depends upon California food production. Enough said.

      Moreover, their risk models no doubt vastly underestimate biological significance of fallout.

    2. My point was simply that while Californians have become inured to the earthquake menace, they are avoiding something worse with radiation--or so it seems. At what point will CA food become hazardous to eat? Years of earthquakes have made this terrible likelihood palatable. It might take a generation or two for the same to occur with respect to Fukushima. And of course Fukushima is just one in a series. I at least do not have a time schedule. If I could look into the future ten years at a time at some point presumably CA and the entire West coast would be different. Depopulated? But then AR and CO and Nevada are not safe either. Surely someone has mapped this out tentatively.


Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.