The government picks scientists who tell it what it wants to hear. these are elevated. others are starved.

[livingston]

eisenhower feared the rise and dominance of the military and industrial might that had driven fascism and imperialism to the fore in the 1930’s. he saw it in germany, in italy, and in japan. he saw it ongoing in the united states and in the soviet union and the cold war was ripe to be waged and to come to dominate public perception and geopolitics as a result. largely, he was correct. for this reason, his farewell address is well remembered for its warnings against the “military industrial complex.”

In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist. We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together

this is a wise and principled man who had seen enough of war and of war mongers to wish to see no more.


the government picks scientists who tell it what it wants to hear. these are elevated. others are starved. soon, anyone entering a field knows that “if you want have a career, you need to study X and your conclusions must look like Y.” this is not exploration, it’s justification. this, in turn, supports the “right sort of government,” a technocratic government, not one pushing choice or a small state. that’s no use to the grant grabbers and subsidy snufflers. so “the science” always comes down on the side of fascist systems because that’s where the gravy train is.



the grant and subsidy system for american science has become VAST and this vastness poses several problems:

technocratic domination: when government funds science, government controls science

eisenhower feared the rise and dominance of the military and industrial might that had driven fascism and imperialism to the fore in the 1930’s.…

boriquagato.substack.com

 

[BerettaGuy]

When Trump won over the anointed queen Hillary, the military-industrial complex was shaken to its core. The Gravy train was over. How dare the population elect someone we didn't pick. Gain of function as part of the military-industrial complex that means Fauchi. The decision was made to initiate Plans to never lose an election again. Everything that is weaponized today, from Social Media to Hollywood media to new media to your phone was mobilized to spread a virus so deadly that you have to tested to know if you have it all to make sure Trump went away and their guy could start more wars.

 

[livingston]

1) Depending on exactly how you measure the expert consensus, it’s somewhere between 90% and 100% that agree humans are responsible for climate change, with most of our studies finding 97% consensus among publishing climate scientists.

Results are presented from a survey held among 1868 scientists studying various aspects of climate change, including physical climate, climate impacts, and mitigation. The survey was unique in its size, broadness and level of detail. Consistent with other research, we found that, as the level of expertise in climate science grew, so too did the level of agreement on anthropogenic causation. 90% of respondents with more than 10 climate-related peer-reviewed publications (about half of all respondents), explicitly agreed with anthropogenic greenhouse gases (GHGs) being the dominant driver of recent global warming. The respondents’ quantitative estimate of the GHG contribution appeared to strongly depend on their judgment or knowledge of the cooling effect of aerosols. The phrasing of the IPCC attribution statement in its fourth assessment report (AR4)—providing a lower limit for the isolated GHG contribution—may have led to an underestimation of the GHG influence on recent warming

https://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/es501998e

Perhaps 25 years ago I heard a program on the radio and a scientist was talking about this climate change scheme. He said if one supported that idea .. your department went from a few people to 25-30 or more .. The department heads were invited to conferences all over the world and even give presentations on the subject.... They rapidly received monetary. pay increases... However if you disagreed with the cause... You might as well be in the dustbin of history..
Start with a cause and then make the results fit the cause.

 

[Dr. Evil]

One reason why I never have and never will listen to what any of their "experts" recommend.

 

[ProgSpear]

@livingston , Ha. I just read this and was going to post it, but you beat me to it. Definitely corroborates the adage that power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.