Axis of Right

Three Native Rhode Islanders Commenting From the Right on Politics and Anything Else

Posts Tagged ‘global warming’

Feeling Green About McCain

Posted by Ryan on May 13, 2008

Well, I’m back! 

I just moved into a better, swankier place so I was AWOL for a while.  My Internet was messed up and my new and exciting digital cable was all pixelated and unclear until about thirty minutes ago.  But now all is well.

I digress. Read the rest of this entry »

Advertisements

Posted in Anything Else, Election 2008, Politics | Tagged: , , , , , , , | 5 Comments »

Global Warming’s Fried President Bush

Posted by Ryan on April 16, 2008

The Global Warming alarmists have finally worn down the GOP passed the weak-kneed crowd, and into the Bush-crowd (which is increasingly looking like only Dubya himself).  Only the open-minded, conservative-wing remains as the firewall against an economic cataclysm based on ever-changing scientific data. 

It goes to show how all Libs need to do is find an issue where they can make Republicans look “mean” and the GOP will fold as fast as they can in order to avoid this label without fighting back.  

I believe a lot of this has to do with a second-term Presidential “legacy” hunt: Bush has decided that getting on the record about climate change and global warming will somehow help him in the annals of history.  He’s not going to get anything through Congress, only suggest some horrible economic policies based on bad science because it’s politically correct nowadays.  

I voted for Dubya in 2004: he was great on Iraq, the War on Terror, taxes, life, judges, etc. (plus look at his opponent!  Did you know John Kerry was in Vietnam?  He was, really!).  This second term has been a nightmare:  amnesty, the Iraq malaise until Petraeus, Harriet Myers, out-of-control spending, getting the knee-pads out for China, etc., now catering to the global warming crowd right when scientists are starting to take another look at it!  Ugh. 

Alas, McCain wouldn’t be any better, and those other two clowns would be much worse.  Going “green” is one thing (a fad mostly — however, once something’s a fad, it’ll eventually go out of style), but the potential for government interference without end, attacking the roots of our capitalist system based on maleable science is scary!  Who does Bush think we are, Europe?

Posted in Culture, Election 2008, Media Bias, Politics, The Iraq Front, War on Terror | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Global Climate Change

Posted by Sal on February 25, 2008

Global Climate Change is happening.  To deny that the climate is changing is to deny science itself.  Virtually 100% of climatologists argue that the Earth’s climate is undergoing change.  I fully support this argument, as it is based on sound scientific analysis and factual data.  Where I disagree, however, is the idea of man-made global warming and the hysteria surrounding it. 

The earth’s climate has been in-flux since its origins 4.5 billion years ago, and during many points of Earth’s history, the change was much more drastic than any changes we are seeing today.  In Europe during the late middle ages, the “Little Ice Age” caused famine, death, and disease (note to liberals — there were no SUVs around during the late middle ages).  In fact, many climatologists attribute the recent warming trends to the end of that Little Ice Age.  It is more likely that we’ll end up in another little ice age, and possibly a great ice age, than it is that we’ll burn up the planet. 

Case in point:  This past January was .03 degrees C lower than the average temperature of the 20th century, and the loweset since 1966.  There is also evidence that the arctic glaciers have actually increased by 10 to 20 cm.  Climatologists are now rethinking their models to take into account variables that they had not before considered. 

What does all this tell us?  The science around global warming is far from certain.  The hype and hysteria is well beyond the actual scientific data, based on computer models and collected data that is less than 40 years old (which is a drop in the bucket in climate terms).  Yet the media, politicians, and quasi-scientists are still pushing the global warming hysteria to reach a philosophical and political end. 

Factions of science have become a new religion of the 20th century.  The modern scientific theocracy now exhibits many of the same qualities and characteristics of its own reformation critics.  Skeptics of particular theories, whether it is global warming or Darwinian natural selection, are ex-communicated from the scientific community, even when they have data to back it up.  Yet unlike religions, it does not admit that it’s precepts are based on faith.  It claims that it is “scientific” or that there is “evidence”, even when a close examination shows said evidence to be missing or flawed.  In the end, the science theocracy is doing more to damage true scientific inquiry than its critics are.  The religion of science has taken hold, and no matter what the evidence suggests, if you want to remain a member in good-standing, you’d better drink the kool-aid. 

Posted in Culture, Politics, Religion | Tagged: , , , , | 2 Comments »

Consensus Science Bunk

Posted by Sal on February 14, 2008

I am an avid reader of National Review Online’s The Corner.  I typically find it a source of good intellectual discussion based in conservative principles, respectful dialog, and good common-sense.  Even when I disagree with what some of the posters of The Corner say, I still find the arguments interesting and well thought-out. 

Two days ago, however, I read a post by John Derbyshire that seemed the antithesis of what the Corner is usually about.  A few days ago, Ben Stein posted an entry on his blog entitled Darwinism:  The Imperialism of Biology?  In it, he points out how the theory of Darwinian Evolution is steeped just as much in culture and momentum as it is in science.  Derbyshire in his response, falls prey to conventional wisdom that all science is empirically based, and that Evolution is supported by the vast body of biological and scientific knowledge.  But Derbyshire goes beyond that, and accuses Stein, by all accounts a rather brilliant man, of losing his marbles.  Derbyshire argues that only the “consensus” of scientists should be taught in schools, not other, alternative theories.  Truth be told, Darwinism is the “consensus” much in the same way as global warming is the “consensus” of scientists.   
I attended Providence College in Providence, RI.  One of the hallmarks of that school is its 2-year, 5 credit per semester Development of Western Civilizations Program.  In it, students are emersed in the philosophy, theology, literature and history from the dawn of civilization through the present.

One of the things that struck me while taking that course is how much of science is really based on a philosophy rather than empirical data.  Of course, things that Derbyshire points out in his post, such as Newtonian Mechanics, Plate Tectonics, and Blood Circulation are based on empirical evidence, and they have a reasonable claim to scientific fact.  Other scientific theories are based just as much on a philosophy of materialism as true scientific evidence — in fact, there was a major correlation between Darwinism, Freud’s psychology theories, and Marxism in how all of those ideas evolved and played off of each other.   

Darwin’s theory on the Origin of Species was that random mutations of species caused a process of evolution from simple microbes to complex human beings.  The problem with Darwinism was that the idea of natural selection is itself scientifically unprovable on its face — it asserts a randomness that is philosophically-based on a materialistic-worldview espoused by Marx and others, rather than any empirical evidence or any use of the scientific method.  If Darwinism were simply a scientific theory, it would assert “Creatures evolve over time by change”.  The theory would then be tested by looking at the fossil record, experiments in mutation, etc.  Darwinism, however, asserts that creatures evolve over time by random changes (i.e. no Divine intervention or genetic code).  Additionally, the lack of evidence found since Origin of Speciesis staggering.  There is very little in the fossil record to support transient species, there is nothing to explain the Cambien explosion, and the mutations he spoke of have not been found to occur naturally in nature. 

I’m not advocating a preaching of a theistic creationism in public schools, but Darwinism is rooted in just as much faith as the creationist beliefs.  It is a philosophical quasi-scientific “truth” that has permeated our culture so far as to take on an almost religious context in and of itself.  Like global warming today, scientists who do offer up alternative scientific theories to evolution (backed by evidence, no less), are ridiculed, ostracised from the scientific community, and their work is not even examined.  The consensus of scientists cannot be changed if the body of scientists is unwilling to consider alternative theories. 

Like Global Warming, the evidence vastly shows that Darwinism is a scientific fraud, a philosophy passed off as science, yet so many people, including Derbyshire, take it as Gospel because of some idea of scientific “consensus”.  That was the point that Ben Stein was trying to make, and I think he made it effectively.  In a Western Culture where Marxist ideas have permeated our education system to such a degree, it is no wonder that Stein’s going against the tide was met with such resistance. 

Posted in Culture | Tagged: , , , , | 9 Comments »