Category: War on Science

The Pseudo-Science of Microaggressions | National Association of Scholars

The problem is, when Sue, Solórzano, and other critical race researchers reject “Eurocentric epistemologies” and “objectivity” they reject the methodology and standards of modern science (e.g., use of a comparison group, sufficient sample size, unbiased questions, replicability of results, use of modern statistical analysis). Instead, critical race theorists value “experiential knowledge” (e.g., the narrative). Such storytelling enables the implementation of a highly politicized agenda and places a social change agenda above objective social science research. It also makes it significantly easier to “prove” the prevalence of microaggressions on campus.

Most important, the critical race paradigm logically and unreflectively results in a one-way analysis pervasive in these studies, which all start with this premise: that microaggressions can only be perceived by non-whites but are only committed by whites. In other words, whites’ perceptions are invalid.

Source: The Pseudo-Science of Microaggressions | National Association of Scholars

Publications – Why Scientists Disagree about Global Warming | Heartland Institute

Probably the only “consensus” among climate scientists is that human activities can have an effect on local climate and that the sum of such local effects could hypothetically rise to the level of an observable global signal. The key questions to be answered, however, are whether the human global signal is large enough to be measured and if it is, does it represent, or is it likely to become, a dangerous change outside the range of natural variability?

Free copy of the book in pdf format. Link is in the article.

Source: Publications – Why Scientists Disagree about Global Warming | Heartland Institute

The WaPo’s lovely palpitations about new EPA head Scott Pruitt

The funniest thing about the article is the authors’ (yes, “authors,” as it took two of them to write this steaming pile of ignorance) . . . the authors’ certitude that consensus is the same as science. In WaPo land, there is no solar activity; there are no pauses in the warming; there aren’t any computer simulations that were decisively wrong; there are no laughable predictions about 20 foot increases in the ocean’s level or double-digit temperature increases; and, most significantly, there is no record of fraud.

Source: The WaPo’s lovely palpitations about new EPA head Scott Pruitt

Monckton’s 10 Steps for Calming Climate Craziness | Climate Scepticism

7. Abolition of the Environmental Protection Agency: The President should exercise his influence over Congress to enact at the earliest opportunity a Bill to abolish the Environmental Protection Agency. The EPA’s activities run counter to the interstate commerce provisions of the U.S. Constitution, and its functions would be better performed if transferred to the States.

Don’t get me wrong—all the suggestions are great. But #7 would be of the most long-lasting benefit.

Source: Monckton’s 10 Steps for Calming Climate Craziness | Climate Scepticism