The problem with the global warming controversy is that we have the unholy marriage of science with politics. Once politicians figure out they can milk a cause for their own benefit, the search for facts goes out the window.
For a discipline like science, where the discovery of the facts lies at the bedrock of the pursuit, this injection of politics is deadly. Science now becomes a matter of political preference. How does a layperson know who to believe anymore?
So we should not be surprised over phenomena such as the debate over vaccines and autism, or much of mainstream medicine for that matter. The vast majority of us have little training in such highly technical matters, so we too often find ourselves left in a quandary as to what the truth really is. This has played itself out for decades in the climate change debate.
The next chapter in this debate might be about to be written. The Daily Caller reports that Judicial Watch has filed suit for what could be explosive information. “Judicial Watch filed a Feb. 6, 2017, Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request seeking communications between National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) scientist Thomas Karl and White House Office of Science and Technology Policy Director John Holdren over the course of Barack Obama’s presidency.”
As an aside, that has always seemed like a very presumptuous title for an organization: “National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration” – as though the government somehow thinks it can administer the oceans and the weather, something it cannot even predict accurately more than a few days out. Anyway, back to the story.
Again, from the Daily Caller: “‘This new lawsuit could result in the release of emails that will help Americans understand how Obama administration officials may have mishandled scientific data to advance the political agenda of global warming alarmism,’ Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said in a statement.'”
While we have our opinions on the matter of global warming, the corruption of science through political manipulation is the issue here, and it is obvious. If global warming is a hoax, the government is perpetuating and spreading it for its own benefit. If it is not a hoax, all of these political machinations behind the scenes are giving it the appearance of one.
In neither case does the public nor the scientific community benefit. What we do know is that much research is conducted with the aid of federal grants. Hence it would be hard to miss the point that it is to the advantage of those researchers to come back with results that advance the government’s goals. And for many years, that would imply that research supporting the global warming theory would be preferable. After all, the money must keep flowing.
Source: The Political Insider