There is No Such Thing as "Bad Science"!

It's easy to be confused about this, but don't be fooled...

The Left has an aggressive campaign to undermine America. Some people will be surprised to find out that one of their primary targets is Science. There are several reasons for this — for instance, that Science is a gatekeeper against bad technical ideas.

Why that is a BIG DEAL is that the Left is intent on (for example) undermining our economy. (We can’t be the world’s superpower with a crippled economy.) One way of doing that is to subvert our Electric Grid, the backbone of our economy.

Their strategy for sabotaging our Electric Grid is to have it severely burdened by unreliable and expensive energy sources, like wind and solar (see here).

Since this is a technical matter, no energy sources should be added to our Electric Grid without going through a scientific assessment, confirming that they are a net societal benefit. This has NEVER been officially done, as the wind and solar lobbyists know quite well that the Science results would be a failure.

The Left’s response to negative Science verdicts is to try to convince the public that “Science has become corrupted,” or that it is “bad Science.” In other words, they would like to remove Science from being a gatekeeper — even in cases like wind and solar where they have been successful in bypassing the gatekeeper.

Two key things need to be understood about real Science: 1) Science is a process, and 2) Science is apolitical. [By definition a process is an inanimate procedure, so it can not have virtues.]

What is the process? For this layperson overview, the answers are the Scientific Method and a Scientific Analysis (see Appendix H). Consistent with their plan, the Left is vigorously attacking the Scientific Method — e.g., see this explanation. K-12 students in some 45 states are no longer being taught the Scientific Method (see here)!

OK, so how do we explain the hundreds of studies where the Science process was not followed and/or the experimenters were clearly trying to promote a political agenda?

And how do we explain a corrupted peer-review process, the major issue of studies not being able to be replicated, the rampant misuse of statistics, etc., etc.?

Easy. None of those are actually Science. Instead, they were pretenders like political science, pseudo-science, astrology, etc.

But these “studies” were often done by credentialed (e.g., Ph.D.) people claiming to be scientists. Isn’t (by definition) the work of scientists, Science? NO!!!!!

Regretfully, there are thousands of scientists who have abandoned their professional commitment to Science, for a variety of reasons, like: 1) financial incentives [e.g., grants], 2) concerns for job security, 3) to assure career advancement, 4) peer pressure, 5) interest in promoting a political agenda they have deemed to be important.

In such situations, this is where anti-science problems like Confirmation Bias and Cognitive Dissonance are often seen. These wayward scientists are well aware that their actions are contrary to Science — and one of their most common internal justifications is “the end justifies the means.” (Note that this “value” standard flies in the face of the Judeo-Christian values the country was founded on.)

Just like there are lawyers who act illegally and priests who act immorally, scientists are people too. However, when lawyers are caught acting illegally there is a procedure where they are disbarred. Likewise, when priests act immorally there is a procedure where they are defrocked.

Unfortunately, there is no such procedure to retract the degrees of scientists who act contrary to the standards of Science. Worse, these fallen parties are often rewarded(!) by getting lucrative financial support from organizations, etc. who benefit from their deviation from real Science.

No wonder the public is confused!

It is imperative to clearly understand that the terms “Science” and “Scientists” are NOT synonymous! Just because a study is signed by several credentialed scientists does NOT mean that the study followed the processes of Science and was apolitical. In other words, a report by scientists does not mean that it is a Scientific Report.

And to our initial point here, such studies are NOT examples of “bad Science,” but rather are classic cases of bad scientists, or good scientists behaving badly.

There is no such thing as “bad Science!”

---

Here are other materials by this scientist that you might find interesting:

Check out the Archives of this Critical Thinking substack.

WiseEnergy.org: discusses the Science (or lack thereof) behind our energy options.

C19Science.info: covers the lack of genuine Science behind our COVID-19 policies.

Election-Integrity.info: multiple major reports on the election integrity issue.

Media Balance Newsletter: a free, twice-a-month newsletter that covers what the mainstream media does not do, on issues from COVID to climate, elections to education, renewables to religion, etc. Here are the Newsletter’s 2023 Archives. Send me an email to get your free copy. When emailing me, please make sure to include your full name and the state where you live. (Of course, you can cancel the Media Balance Newsletter at any time - but why would you?

Thanks for reading Critically Thinking About Select Societal Issues! Please pass a link to this article on to other associates who might benefit. They can subscribe for FREE to receive new posts (typically about once a week).