Trump called anti-science for rejecting liberal scientists

One of the most effective ways the liberal media has controlled political debate is to define their own facts as either social science or hard science, and then say that anyone who disputes their "facts" are anti-science.

For example, scientists have told us that having a question on the census asking whether one is a U.S. citizen would lead to lower-quality census results. Really. The Census actually has a scientific advisory committee, which uses the cover of "science" to advocate political positions.

But what really aggravates the Left is that Trump doesn't have a liberal academic whispering in his ear. Trump has left the post of White House science advisor unfilled.

Mr. Trump is the first president since 1941 not to name a science adviser...

It's about time!

The lack of traditional scientific advisory leadership in the White House is one example of a significant change in the Trump administration: the marginalization of science in shaping United States policy.

If you don't have a liberal scientist advising you, you are against science. The article even showed a photo of Kim Jong Un celebrating with scientists--look, even Kim Jong Un consults with scientists! I wonder if they advise him about global warming.

There is no chief scientist at the State Department, where science is central to foreign policy matters such as cybersecurity and global warming.

I'm glad there is no chief scientist to talk about imaginary global warming. The State Department's primary role is to promote American interests abroad. That's important, but has very little to do with science, and zero to do with "cybersecurity."

Nor is there a chief scientist at the Department of Agriculture

Why not leave agricultural science to agricultural businesses? Was there no farming before the Department of Agriculture? Was there no food? Do farmers need the Department of Agriculture to tell them how to farm?

Both the Interior Department and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration have disbanded climate science advisory committees.

Very good!

After Mr. Trump last year withdrew from the Paris climate agreement, the international pact committing nations to tackle global warming, France started a program called “Make Our Planet Great Again” — named in reference to Mr. Trump’s slogan, “Make America Great Again” — to lure the best American scientists to France. The program has so far provided funding for 24 scientists from the United States and other countries to do their research in France.

Good. They should all go to France!

The article goes on to say that Trump has no scientific advisor to advise him on nuclear issues when dealing with North Korea. President Obama, by contrast, had two top scientific advisors who helped him with his nuclear deal with Iran. One has to wonder, however, if these scientific advisors informed Obama that the Iranians could "self-inspect" on certain nuclear sites rather than allow outside inspectors, or whether they told Obama that after a handful of years that Iran would be free to enrich as much uranium as it liked. Somehow all these great scientific advisors didn't stop Obama from agreeing to a terrible deal.

The article doesn't point out all the help Trump can and will get from the Department of Energy, Department of Defense, the CIA, and the National Security Council, who all have their own scientific resources, because that doesn't fit into the article's narrative.

Several Interior Department scientists have resigned to protest actions... that are perceived as undermining research.

Among them was Joel Clement, a climate change scientist who was reassigned to an office overseeing fees from fossil fuel drilling. He viewed it as an effort to push him to resign. Months later, he did.

“The reassignment letter seemed clearly retaliatory,” he said. “I was a top climate adviser, and they reassigned me to collect money from oil companies — come on.”

And now we come to what this article is really all about. There are thousands of parasites in government who call themselves scientists or bureaucrats or civil servants whose only purpose is to "study" or "advise" on imaginary global warming. They suck at the taxpayer teat while clamping down ever tighter on the source which feeds them. The more the government sheds phony scientists, the better off it will be.

It's great to see President Trump not be intimidated as other Republicans are by claims of being "anti-science". If anything we need to reclaim the word and get back to real, evidence based science. And getting rid of fake scientists is a good first step.

 

Ed Straker is the senior writer at Newsmachete.com.

One of the most effective ways the liberal media has controlled political debate is to define their own facts as either social science or hard science, and then say that anyone who disputes their "facts" are anti-science.

For example, scientists have told us that having a question on the census asking whether one is a U.S. citizen would lead to lower-quality census results. Really. The Census actually has a scientific advisory committee, which uses the cover of "science" to advocate political positions.

But what really aggravates the Left is that Trump doesn't have a liberal academic whispering in his ear. Trump has left the post of White House science advisor unfilled.

Mr. Trump is the first president since 1941 not to name a science adviser...

It's about time!

The lack of traditional scientific advisory leadership in the White House is one example of a significant change in the Trump administration: the marginalization of science in shaping United States policy.

If you don't have a liberal scientist advising you, you are against science. The article even showed a photo of Kim Jong Un celebrating with scientists--look, even Kim Jong Un consults with scientists! I wonder if they advise him about global warming.

There is no chief scientist at the State Department, where science is central to foreign policy matters such as cybersecurity and global warming.

I'm glad there is no chief scientist to talk about imaginary global warming. The State Department's primary role is to promote American interests abroad. That's important, but has very little to do with science, and zero to do with "cybersecurity."

Nor is there a chief scientist at the Department of Agriculture

Why not leave agricultural science to agricultural businesses? Was there no farming before the Department of Agriculture? Was there no food? Do farmers need the Department of Agriculture to tell them how to farm?

Both the Interior Department and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration have disbanded climate science advisory committees.

Very good!

After Mr. Trump last year withdrew from the Paris climate agreement, the international pact committing nations to tackle global warming, France started a program called “Make Our Planet Great Again” — named in reference to Mr. Trump’s slogan, “Make America Great Again” — to lure the best American scientists to France. The program has so far provided funding for 24 scientists from the United States and other countries to do their research in France.

Good. They should all go to France!

The article goes on to say that Trump has no scientific advisor to advise him on nuclear issues when dealing with North Korea. President Obama, by contrast, had two top scientific advisors who helped him with his nuclear deal with Iran. One has to wonder, however, if these scientific advisors informed Obama that the Iranians could "self-inspect" on certain nuclear sites rather than allow outside inspectors, or whether they told Obama that after a handful of years that Iran would be free to enrich as much uranium as it liked. Somehow all these great scientific advisors didn't stop Obama from agreeing to a terrible deal.

The article doesn't point out all the help Trump can and will get from the Department of Energy, Department of Defense, the CIA, and the National Security Council, who all have their own scientific resources, because that doesn't fit into the article's narrative.

Several Interior Department scientists have resigned to protest actions... that are perceived as undermining research.

Among them was Joel Clement, a climate change scientist who was reassigned to an office overseeing fees from fossil fuel drilling. He viewed it as an effort to push him to resign. Months later, he did.

“The reassignment letter seemed clearly retaliatory,” he said. “I was a top climate adviser, and they reassigned me to collect money from oil companies — come on.”

And now we come to what this article is really all about. There are thousands of parasites in government who call themselves scientists or bureaucrats or civil servants whose only purpose is to "study" or "advise" on imaginary global warming. They suck at the taxpayer teat while clamping down ever tighter on the source which feeds them. The more the government sheds phony scientists, the better off it will be.

It's great to see President Trump not be intimidated as other Republicans are by claims of being "anti-science". If anything we need to reclaim the word and get back to real, evidence based science. And getting rid of fake scientists is a good first step.

 

Ed Straker is the senior writer at Newsmachete.com.