Persons who are not properly trained in science are not in a position to promote the science of a subject, as the global warming issue demonstrates. But proper evaluation and criticism are totally different things. Everyone has a responsibility to criticize wherever they find a concern. This is because the first concern of criticism is in standards which are independent of details. Standards determine the difference between objective reality and propaganda; and everyone is in a position to evaluate standards.

Also, reporters can and must describe every element of the subject including the details and evidence. Reporting does not require scientific expertise, though a little helps. If reporters don't describe the subject, who will? Scientists cannot do what reporters do, because they don't have the time or access to publishing. There is a lot of difference between representing an argument and attempting to shape the argument. Part of the difference is in what people expect. They don't expect reporting to be source material.

Al Gore's movie is blatant propaganda. I can say this without having seen the movie, in part from the descriptions, but more importantly from the social position it has acquired. It is being used as a reference, particularly for children, who are not in a position to understand the deceptions.

Al Gore has not the slightest ability to evaluate the science of global warming, because he has spent a lifetime as a politician. There are certain things a person needs to do to learn how to properly evaluate science. First, a person needs to understand all of the basic principles of science which apply to the subject. Quite a bit of study is required to get a good grasp of the basics of science. Then a person needs to learn methodologies through practice and discipline. One element is how to investigate a subject properly. Another element is how to properly represent a subject. Another is how to show evidence for claims. Another is how to remove subjectivity and prejudices from an analysis.

Al Gore has not a clue that any of this matters. He shows ice melting and claims humans must be the cause. Showing ice melting is photography, not science.

People need to know what the evidence is for the claims. There is nothing for evidence in the promotion of global warming hype. The agitators are falling back upon consensus only. Is there no such thing as consensus which is wrong? Nazism was based upon enforcement of consensus through worship of a ruler. It's no different from the enforcement of a supposed consensus on global warming based upon an official report being unquestionable. To impose consensus is like torturing in the prisons; it's not a valid thing to do.

Once proper scientific communication exists including a description of evidence, truth will invariably evolve forward. The problem is that proper scientific communication is not significantly visible on the subject of global warming. Not the least problem is that there is so much fraud in the official science of global warming that journalists cannot separate the facts from the frauds.

The fraud of the science is not in being wrong or in disagreeing; it is in not showing evidence through proper communication and representation of science principles.

Brainwashing the Kids

Kids are being brainwashed in the schools on global warming and other subjects such as environmentalism, where they are not in a position to evaluate those subjects or any other. It's not appropriate to go beyond basics in education because of the inability of students to evaluate. Even in college, proper evaluation is not possible until graduate school. Not only do you need to have all of the basics understood before evaluating, but you then need the time and opportunity to do your own independent research to base proper evaluations on. Graduate students do this. While undergraduates learn the process, they cannot properly form opinions due to their limitations in background basics and lack of time and opportunity for independent research. What undergrads do is learn the process by mimicking opinions in journalism; but they can't properly evaluate those subjects themselves.

There is nothing wrong with having opinions or promoting the opinions which one has, at any age. Proper standards of criticism account for limitations. The problem is indoctrination where there is supposed to be a study of basics in the schools. Not only that, but the kids are told to act upon the propaganda by doing and promoting the causes, such as global warming.

This standard is an attempt to reshape the social order by getting to the minds of the most impressionable persons before they can properly evaluate the material. The Nazis placed a strong emphasis on brainwashing the kids this way. In Nazi Germany, the kids had to march after school for several years before they even knew who the enemy was they were going to fight. It is becoming more and more fashionable to brainwash school kids throughout the western world in the same way the Nazis did. The parallel with Nazism cannot be overstated. Global warming fraud is being forced down everyone's throats through force and violence, while the price is a destroyed economy and energy infrastructure. It's a covert war against the lower classes, which is were the primary price is always paid for social destructivity.

The Motives — Ted Lang
Global Warming Main Page