Bad Science and Really Bad Solutions.

Media manipulation has risen to an all time high. Propaganda and advertising began using the science of psychiatry to manipulate the population in the 1920s as the result of theories presented by Edward Bernays. Bernays had a more famous relative, Sigmund Freud, who created psychiatry. The use of media to manipulate people increased in the 1950s as reported by Vance Packard in his book, "The Hidden Persuaders", which outlined the use of subliminal motivators. The best book on subliminal manipulation was written in 1974 by Wilson Bryan Key and is called "Subliminal Seduction". It is out of print, what a surprise. I have an original printing which I bought at the time of publishing. I spent a decade researching it which led to me studying hypnosis and mind control which led me to research MK Ultra. In fact I read much about the Church Commission that uncovered the CIA's work on mind control. You can read what the Church Committee said in their reports. To read the actual MK Ultra documents that were released by the CIA, I would direct you to The Black Vault, a website that is the leader in getting government documents using the Freedom of Information Act. I also would like to tip my hat, once again, for John Greenwald Jr, for creating the site and collecting millions of documents allowing us access to source materials.

My starting point in researching anything is that you cannot trust summaries or hearsay, that is why I always publish links to the actual documents when available and have since I began this blog. The reality is that opinions that are not backed up by source documentation or fail to follow the scientific method are almost completely useless to me. When I read the source documents I always look for bias and bullshit. In fact, if you yourself have not read the source documents you cannot hold a valid supportable opinion.

Now I am going to talk about climate science, again. Firstly, science requires experiments and testing to validate a theory, not mathematical models. Models do not prove cause and effect, experiments do and they must be reproducible. I do not believe in manmade global warming because they cannot show me the experiments and you can do anything you want with statistics. The true science deniers refuse to use the scientific method and use mathematical models that have not been proven to not have predictive power. That is a fact. Another maxim in science is that extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.

When I cannot find proof for an assumption, I assume that I am being lied to for a reason. I presume that Hegelian dialectic, which is short for create a problem, have people demand a solution and then implement the solution you wanted in the first place. It is the essence of leading the public to do things that do not benefit them. It is how we got into the Iraq war. Tell people that Hussein has weapons of mass destruction, convince people we must act immediately to protect them from the weapons and then invade the country. Afterwards, it didn't matter that no such weapons were found because that was not the real reason we went in.

We are told that the solution to global warming is to cease all man made CO2 emissions by 2050. We are supposed to achieve this by eating 90% less meat, converting to wind and solar and living on less, smaller living spaces and smaller lives. We are told to achieve these things by making international law pre-eminent over national sovereignty and extreme restrictions on all areas of your life. We are also told that we cannot ask China or India to restrict their emissions because it would be unfair until they have polluted as much as the United States and the west did since the 1940s. Huh?

Let us say that I believed that CO2 was bad and that manmade CO2 was going to kill us all by 2050, I can think of much better solutions to the problem. Firstly, stop the deforestation of the Amazon. Buy the land. Increasing forests reduces CO2 by scrubbing it and turning it into Oxygen. That would reduce CO2 and cause less problems for how people live. Secondly, convert to Hydrogen as our primary energy source. The burning of hydrogen creates Oxygen, not CO2. In fact Toyota makes a car that runs on hydrogen cell technology and power plants can be converted to it with very little changes to technology. Unlike wind and solar, hydrogen production can be increased to meet what the energy industry calls "peek demand". Sounds good right? In fact the fact that I don't believe in manmade global warming does not make me adverse to decreasing carbon emissions and converting to hydrogen power and it would cost less. An easy and relatively inexpensive solution is ignored in favor of very draconian and expensive solutions, why? It is ignored in favor of an international carbon tax.

So, what is the system of a global carbon tax? Well, every country would be allotted a specific amount of CO2 and be regulated by an international body of unelected people. It is a zero sum gain solution and those always stink for the majority. So, if there are better solutions and the science is garbage, why should I believe the people peddling imminent global catastrophe who rely on statistics rather than science? If you haven't read the source documents, why would you be patinate about global warming? The answer is simple, because you are responding to fear mongering and propaganda.

My outlook for the future is bleak. I think the alarmists will win. I have no belief that my opinion will effect the outcome and on one level, I just don't care that much. I don't think I can really break through the programming of most people and am content providing my readers with understanding. Then again, I only need to reach one person who will look up what I say, evaluate it honestly and then have the strength to intelligently act on it.