Tuesday, December 18, 2018

97% of Scientists Agree that the Earth is Flat

Or so one would have to conclude based upon the reasoning demonstrated in the video embedded below.

But first, let's look at what the presenter has to say,

"First, you identify the 'experts.'

In this case, the 'experts' are thousands of scientists who study climate and publish their work in peer-reviewed journals.

Peer review means that every finding that's published is analyzed by people working in the same field, people who really know what they are talking about. [I.E. 'experts.' Or scientists who don't question the official theory and end up being de-funded or driving cabs.]

It's not flawless.

Mistakes occasionally happen, but this system is built to correct those mistakes, [by de-funding and cab driving] and it's by far the best process humans have ever come up with for doing good [political] science.

Once we find this [surviving] group of experts, we analyze their opinion: for or against a particular idea.

Sometimes this is done by studying whatever scientists have written in their papers.

Other times scientists are surveyed directly.

This can even be done by listening to what scientists say in public."

It is almost never done by analyzing how much their careers and incomes and government grants depend upon having certain views.

Here's the good part,

"Now some scientists don't express an opinion either way.

They're not included in the analysis.

Consensus is the fraction (italics - mine) of those who support an idea divided by the sum of those who support plus those who reject the idea.

All these different methods have ended up with the same conclusion. [No shit!] The people who know the most almost universally agree about what's causing global warming."

It goes on to argue that those 'experts' who don't state their agreement with the politically desired conclusion can be included in the 97% consensus, without explicitly agreeing with it just because the "science is already settled." How convenient.

And so, I believe it could be similarly argued:

100% of all scientists agree that the earth is flat. And it's a very strange claim to make, that any scientist who doesn't write "I believe that the earth is flat" is actually uncertain, or doesn't believe that the earth is flat.

Not a controversial idea today but before the 1960s and 1970s, most scientists had not accepted the idea of a flat earth for about 2,000 years. Prove me wrong.

Researchers looked at recent geology papers using the same criteria the critics of flat earth theory should be using on the capitalism-induced spherical earth dogma: That any paper that doesn't explicitly state that "the earth is flat" should be counted as uncertain or, or as rejecting flat earth theory.

Some say not giving a position on the flat earth theory is exactly what you would expect from scientists who agree that something's basically settled, like how physicists don't write, "God created the heavens and the earth in seven days" in every single paper, that Justin Trudeau is a genius, that gravity is a crisis of capitalism due to air travel and tall buildings, or that Donald Trump is following orders from Vladimir Putin. They're accepted as true.

And since, the acceptance of flat earth theory isn't explicitly stated in 97% of the scientific papers, the scientific "consensus" on the earth being flat is pretty near 97%.

This is the main reason why western countries need to import many millions of people from the third world. If the weight of people becomes too high in some corners of the world, the earth could capsize and we would all fall off. (See - gravity.)


On the claim that "there are people out there who spend a lot of money and effort manufacturing doubt." Well, that's nothing compared to the amount of money that is spent on promoting the climate change scam.

According to Marc Morano, global warming promoters receive "3,500 times as much money as anything offered to skeptics." (Page 241 - The Politically Incorrect Guide to Climate Change.)


At first I was going to use man-made tectonic plate shifting, with its attendant demands for the cessation of all mining and drilling, as my comparison, instead of flat earth theory, but decided to research whether the hoaxers had already discovered this angle as a Plan B, should the climate hoax finally be exposed.

Unsurprisingly, I discovered that earthquakes, tsunamis, and tectonic plate shifting were already being blamed on human activity. (Mining, drilling, and fracking etc. I.E. - mostly capitalism and prosperity.)

Newsweek.

National Geographic.

And this one, which I found most enjoyable of all of them all, not least for the comments that readers left. (eg. tax the water!)


Other Resources

What is a ‘climate scientist’?

97% "Consensus" (Marc Morano)


No comments:

Post a Comment

Please feel free to leave your comments, insults, or threats.

Holocaust Denial?

I've just finished reading a very interesting article that came to my inbox today from Paul Craig Roberts. As a climate emergency skep...