Guest Post by Willis Eschenbach-Crossposted from my blog, Skating Under The Ice.
Well, the bad news is that a whole bunch of scientists are going to have a march on Washington … on Earth Day.
Why is this a bad idea? Three reasons. There’s no clarity on what they are marching for. There’s no clarity on what they are marching against. And they are marching on Earth Day.
Here’s what I mean about clarity. If you ask anyone on the street what Donald Trump’s message was during the campaign, you get a variety of answers. Build the wall. Make America great again. Drain the swamp. Bring back the jobs. Different answers, but almost everybody can tell you something that Trump stood for.
Now, ask people what Hillary’s message was … crickets. The problem was she didn’t have a message. A few months after the election, and hardly anyone can remember what she stood for … nor do we have any idea what the scientist are marching for.
You see, Hillary proved that being AGAINST something is not sufficient. She tried to run as the “anti-Trump”, and managed to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.
And now, the scientists are doing the same thing. They think that casting themselves as the anti-Trump scientists is sufficient, even when they are not at all clear about what they are against. It seems they are driven by their fears rather than by any event or actual danger.
Well, that’s not entirely true about them not being for anything. Here you go, here’s what passes for their message:
“Yes, this is a protest, but it’s not a political protest,” said Jonathan Berman, a postdoctoral fellow at the University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio and a lead organizer of the march. “The people making decisions are in Washington, and they are the people we are trying to reach with the message: You should listen to evidence.”
“Listen to evidence”? That’s it?
You mean like the evidence that showed beyond question that Donald Trump couldn’t win the election? You mean like the evidence that Michael Mann and the Climategate conspirators made up out of the whole cloth? You mean like the evidence of Ioannidis who showed that most peer-reviewed published scientific research is false? The evidence that Ioannidis referred to when he said that “Evidence-based medicine has been hijacked“? That evidence?
But setting the weak and uncertain nature of the “evidence” aside, that is the among the most pathetic slogans imaginable. Why?
Because every single person that I know who hears “You should listen to evidence!”, including myself, scientists and non-scientists alike, will say the same thing:
I AM LISTENING TO EVIDENCE, FOOL, DON’T INSULT ME!
And the “people making decisions in Washington” will all say the same. Find me one person who thinks they are not listening to the evidence … you’ll look for a long time. All of us believe we can tell gold from fools gold.
I feel sorry for these folks. They are most likely good scientists in their fields, but they truly are out of their depth organizing either a march or a movement. A public march is only worth doing if you have a clear and compelling message. You need to show people a path from here to the desired future, offer real actions people can take, and urge people to take those actions. But “You should listen to evidence”? Where does that go?
Not only that, but they are marching on Earth Day! Talk about the height of cluelessness. Do they really think that becoming just another part of the highly politically polarized and generally anti-human Earth Day circus is going to make them more visible, more viable, or more believable?
Do they truly think that hanging out with people who advocate “de-development” and forced population reduction and who think that humans are a “plague on the earth” will burnish their scientific credentials?
On Earth Day the scientists will be in the middle of the usual pseudo-scientific parade of “iridologists”, and “reflexologists”, and folks who think turning out their lights for an hour shows they are virtuous, and homeopathic snake oil salesmen, and people against some war somewhere … on what planet is this possibly of any benefit to science? Whose brilliant scheme is this? Find that person and fire them immediately.
All that having the march on Earth Day will do is dilute and distract from the scientist’s message … not that that will make much difference given the pathetic message. But again, whose bright idea is this? You want to march on a day when nothing is going on, when every camera in town is focused on you alone.
Finally, these folks don’t seem to understand the position of scientists in society these days. Wearing a lab coat doesn’t mean what it used to mean. Today, I laughed to see that Bill Nye the Science Guy’s lab coat was a prop in a SuperBowl ad for Tide detergent. Oh, they got Bill’s lab coat whiter than white … but they couldn’t clean up his reputation, or that of science. Remember what Ioannidis found out: these days, most peer-reviewed results are false. And don’t think that people haven’t noticed. We’ve seen too many “evidence-based” predictions of impending doom from eminent scientists, predictions that have all crashed and burned. No atolls sunk in the ocean. No 50 million climate refugees by 2010. No “population bomb” exploding. No food riots in the streets.
Here’s the rude truth.
In the US in 2017, for a large segment of the populace, too many scientists are just stuck up elites in lab coats who want to lecture us on how we should live.
For those people, scientists are right up there with Hollywood dilettantes like Leonardo DeCaprio, taking a helicopter from his mega-yacht in the Mediterranean to the airport, where he boards a private jet to New York to tell us all how we’re eco-criminals for burning too much fossil fuel. And just like the scientists, DeCaprio keeps telling us we should “listen to the evidence” … riiiight, we’ll get on that straightaway …
And now, for that same segment of the electorate, guess what they see happening. The scientists are having a hissy-fit because people are no longer listening to their terrifying lectures about the horrible dangers of, well, everything—margarine will kill us this week, but next week butter will kill us and margarine is OK, this week diesel cars will save Europe, next week diesel cars are choking it with pollution … and as a result, more and more people are like “Talk to the hand, the head’s not listening!”.
And in a stunning move that couldn’t possibly go wrong, the elite scientists have decided to strike out against the Trumpian Oppression Of Noble Scientists and march around Washington in their lab coats and lecture us some more …
Really? That’s their plan? We’re gonna bow to the irresistible force of the lab coat?
And here’s the best part. This is the message of the lecture from the scientific elite—we plebes, as well as the “people making decisions in Washington”, are either not smart enough to recognize evidence when we see it, or we are deliberately ignoring evidence.
Yeah, that’ll fetch ’em all right, tell us we’re stupid! That will convince us to change our evil ways … after all, insulting your opposition worked so well for Hillary …
So I implore all scientists, please don’t add your names to this foolish attempt. Don’t go on this march around Washington to lecture us on why we’re wrong. It will just piss people off and further damage the reputation of science and scientists. We’re lectured out, you’ve cried “wolf” too many times. Stay home and enjoy the day.
Four AM on a rainy morning … yeah, I am a night owl … all the good things of life to you all.
w.
PLEASE, if you are commenting, QUOTE THE EXACT WORDS YOU ARE DISCUSSING so we can all understand your subject.
Trump’s message was clear. MAGA needs no explanation. Not so, Hillary’s rational for running–“IMT IWLE”. “It’s my turn; I’ve waited long enough.” Mostly because she couldn’t actually say that. But it was the reason she was running.
Celebrate ‘Earth Hour’ by lighting up the main street.
http://i22.photobucket.com/albums/b331/kevster1346/Mauritius.jpg
Scientists marching… a/k/a exercising… outside. In direct sunlight. Where the fresh air will get into their lungs.
Someone didn’t think this through (or more likely, very few actual scientists will be in that march, more likely people who “love science” as long as they don’t have to learn any).
Yes. In my experience the people who most like science tend not to be the sort of people who like to go on marches loudly complaining about something or other.
(y)
Science is not a popularity contest to the highest bidder, i.e. the Clinton Foundation et al.
But these Fools should march to show the world their banality and stupidity as a clown car in a Circus of Fools.
Their real horror is the loss of money! As fraudsters at EPA, NASA, NOAA, NSF, USGS and the smurf agencies employees lose money, The AGU, AMS, APS and AAAS loose money multiplied.
Ah Ha! The raison d’être of the AGU “President” is a dead corpse on a street in Chicago.
Ha ha
Scientists have the social justice big green virus just like anyone else who has gone through today’s John Dewey progressive leftist educational system. Sad thing is they don’t understand that people are starting to see them as shills and tools, which many of them have become. They may start to see the light when the funding dries up. And dry up it will. They won’t be happy until citizens hold them in contempt.
I suggest we think of some signs the alt-scientists might hold… like: Trans Climate Scientists need love too!
Or… “You know you need us”
How about, “We are worth the billions in taxes we get”
Also… each climate scientist needs a propeller beanie that says, “wind powered brain”
Twas ever thus. remember Vietnam?
Stop the war!
Never “start the peace”
New leftism is vociferous opposition to bad stuff:its all about stating issues and problems.
It has no solutions though.
Leftism has always defined peace as being the absence of opposition to themselves.
Just what the nation needs, another group of clueless protesters, sigh….The marching scientists won’t do much for their reputations, this most certainly is true, but they will be good useful idiots for the global warming scare mongers to help bolster their cause. The media too will trot out endless clips of them, especially if they have signs.
Oh, they are very clear on what they’re marching for…. Funding and political power.
We need some people in Washington who will go up to the first scientist in a lab coat with a sign “Listen to the evidence”, and say: “OK, I’ll listen. Tell me the evidence.”
And you won’t get told any. I have been pleading with all and sundry for years: “If there’s any evidence I don’t know about that proves this global warning alarm is true, please tell it to me, because I cannot find any.”
If anyone gets some actual evidence out of these fools, I’ll be very greatly surprised.
What evidence should we listen to? The only message I seem to get is that climate science is beyond question.
That means it has a clear cut answer yes to the one question of can you prove it beyond any doubt whatever an not just beyond reasonable doubt? So let us see it openly presented clearly honestly with no adjustments and certainly none to data previously sold as beyond question.
Require every government scientist who marches to answer one of five randomly selected philosophical scientific questions. Then collate the results.
Sack the ones who most need sacking!
Scientists who march.. remember this
YOU ARE BEING LAUGHED AT
just like the March for Women was LAUGHED at.
Just like the supporters for Hilarity… are being LAUGHED at..
You are a JOKE that just KEEPS ON GIVING !!
cue….. mosh, nick, griff, McClod etc etc
You are a JOKE that just KEEPS ON GIVING !!
Thanks Willis. A good analysis of both Hilary and the march. They are not along in failing to set clear objectives and therefore a clear message. Everywhere I went in my career I found these idiots in charge of their bloody great mess.
Thanks Willis. The best possible counterpoint to yesterday’s call to arms by Martin Reese.
Willis: “I write for the lurkers”….”folks who think more than they comment, whose minds may well not be made up, and who outnumber commenters by at least ten to one”.
On that basis, I totally agree.
There may be a smidgen of evidence that some “news” outlets are softening the rhetoric just a tad. It might be because they fear they may be marginalised if they continue the shrieking.
That is what I was getting at. There may be a deliberate ploy by the present white house to let the MSM get so distracted dealing with fairly outrageous tweets etc., that people on the right (and maybe the centre) just gives up entirely on parts of the MSM. Once the more left-leaning outlets and organisations start to realise that, there may be a return to debate. For example yesterday Democrat Dianne Feinstein made some reasoned comments, in contrast to the stance of “I oppose”, whatever it might be, made by many of her colleagues.
Thank you for the dialogue, and best wishes…..
Two comments.
In my job duties, I engage scientists across a large state university system employing thousands of scientists in conversations about workplace safety, environmental compliance and stewardship. These are scientists ranging from laboraticians to field researchers to extension educators. I regularly broach the subject of climate change, and RARELY do I hear one who believes in CAGW. The one exception I can recall is an activist, blogging researcher in an atmospheric sciences department. My admittedly anecdotal evidence is that the 97% claim is reversed.
Second. LAB COATS ARE PPE. Cardinal rule – Never wear your lab coat outside of the lab! Anyone who does is written up for a safety violation. So, if anyone shows up at the march in a lab coat, he/she is not a well-trained scientist, if a scientist at all. The same is true of medical scientists (doctors). Recall Obama’s photo op backed by a “church choir” of alleged doctors in lab coats. If any of those was my doctor, I’d fire him/her in a nanosecond.
Engineers use the forces and materials of nature for the economic benefit of mankind. As an engineer, you know those guys who actually use what scientists produce to make things, I don’t understand the meaning of “listen to the science”. I was never told to “listen to the science” in engineering school. To me “listen to the science” sounds like a recipe for engineering disaster, and spending billions on something not necessary when you could be spending money on something needed is one of the definitions of an engineering disaster. Engineers dont listen to the science, the have to understand all aspects of the science and have confidence that the science is repeatable and useful enough to make good predictions. Otherwise engineers are just winging it … and winging it isn’t engineering it is gambling.
Oops meant “listen to the evidence” not “listen to the science”. Was thinking of a protestor sign.
The Left has a great record of destroying everything they touch. Doing an anti-Trump march seems to fit in their drive to put trust in science and scientist in general into the same bucket as those that trust the MSM.
UCF has a group who’s goal is to teach leftists how to beat up Republicans.
http://www.campusreform.org/?ID=8741
They are going to run into some conceal carry holders. And that is going to blow this up in their face.
However well intended you were, philjourdan, your concealed carry commit is incendiary and misleading.
Concealed carry permittees are among the most peaceable identifiable group on the planet. Read up on it.
@Dave Fair – CCs do not carry to be macho or for a phallic symbol. They carry it for protection. The issue is these animals attacking, usually en masse as they are cowards one on one, seemingly defenseless folks. CCs will not seek a confrontation, but when a mob sucker punches them or whacks them with a 2×4, they will defend themselves.
You misunderstood my comment. At no time did I say they would initiate violence. But they will respond to violence directed at them. And that is the perils the rioters have yet to face, mostly because they riot in GFZs – or as they are better known – baiting crazy areas.
philjourdan, my comment was not meant as a personal criticism.
In any case, one against a violent mob is a losing proposition.
As Gordie said in Stand by Me, you only have to take out the leaders.
Progressives lead from the rear. Didn’t you listen to our departed, but still revered, Dear Leader?
Yea, that is how the French beat the Germans in WWII.
That, too. But the big libs incite the gullible mobs; while at the same time accusing President Trump of inciting the right wing.
Which political persuasion riots? Fear of the Tea Party was grossly over blown. Fear of the radical libs is rational.
There is a very tired question that new artists ask in forums consisting of more experienced artists: “What is art?” — Nobody can really answer the question, or everybody answers the question significantly differently, because the word has lost touch with the reality of what it originally came into existence to describe.
I wonder whether the word, “science” is headed down this same path. What is science? will eventually elicit the response, “Oh no, not that lame question again.”
So, I would say the writer of this post is not reporting a truly surprising fact about the lack of clarity that these marchers might have in their purposes. People don’t behave out of clarity so much as out of reflex.
What’s the reflex here? That’s a question that I leave for your speculation.
The less clarity that a word has, the more marchers who can stand behind it. For example, if the slogan were March for Cliodynamics or March for Computational Social Science or March for Recombinant Memetics, then I doubt that very many people would show up.
Love all your stuff, Willis. And this is excellent advice, which will be ignored. Pass the special Earth Day popcorn!
Rev up that polar bear costume factory in china for the protest, more good photo ops!
If Hanson shows up that will seal the name for this march: The Mad Hatters March.
I searched the NYT website for “John Bates” and got nothing. Meanwhile a physiologist post-doc from a health center I have never heard of is some big leader of science worthy of mention in a NYT article. We aren’t talking about an endowed professor of physics at Yale, we are talking about a post-doc at a medical center. Not a climate researcher, a physiologist who can’t get a real job. JC the world is upside down.