First: I'd actually built up quite a bit of respect for you as someone who, despite our differences of opinion on some matters, was of intelligence of reason. But the very fact you're touting the work of the Cato Institute has knocked you back a couple of miles.The Cato Institute is an ideologically-motived political pressure group. They, the good little right-wing libertarian neo-conservative think tank that they are, feel that the EPA is part of an evil porkbarrel scheme of big government to socially engineer the populace into doing things that hurt honest-to-goodness businesspeople. This is their conclusion. With this conclusion in mind, they go out and attempt to find scientific proof that agencies such as the EPA are full of shit, and will dig up as many disgruntled scientists as possible to back this up. Their logic inevitably forces them to make statements that are utterly sidesplittingly stupid (examples follow).
The good folks at http://www.creationism.org are also an ideological pressure group. They, the good little right-wing fundies that they are, feel that the teaching evolution in school is part of an evil atheist scheme of big government to socially engineer the populace into disavowing the word of God and turning our children into Satanist Darwin-lovers. This is their conclusion. With this conclusion in mind, they go out and attempt to find scientific proof that the scientific community is full of shit, and will dig up as many disgruntled scientists as possible to back this up. Their logic inevitably forces them to make statements that are utterly sidesplittingly stupid , many of which our resident greek letter has brought up and you have intelligently refuted. (Carbon dating being unproven, moon dust, dinosaurs living with humans...)
Ideology shouldn't influence science. www.junkscience.com is devoted to pointing out that media spin has indeed influenced science. Yes, there is a lot of junk science out there. A lot of the paranoia about GM foods has been whipped up by the media from "a few scientists are cautious and a few radical environmental groups are concerned" to "scientists are divided on the safety of so-called frankenfoods." But junkscience isn't practicing what it preaches. With the conclusion already in mind that the EPA is a politically-motivated agency of evil Stalinism, Cato/Junkscience seek out to undermine the overwhelming body of evidence on a lot of matters no differently than advocates of so-called "creation science" seek out to undermine the overwhelming body of evidence on evolution, because in their minds its a foregone conclusion that the Earth was created in six days six thousand years ago by the Christian God.
Cato/Junkscience think the government's attempts at regulating smoking in public establishments is simply an evil way of social engineering. They back this up by saying
quote:
A credible link between secondhand smoke and lung cancer remains elusive despite more than 40 published studies.
(source: http://www.junkscience.com/foxnews/fn030901.htm )Cato/Junkscience think the outcry over the clearcutting of the Amazon is radical environmentalist propaganda with no basis in fact, promoting this video.
Cato/Junkscience don't think DDT is harmful
quote:
But there never was, and still isn�t a scientific basis for DDT fearmongering.
(source: http://www.junkscience.com/foxnews/fn120100.htm )Cato/Junkscience think PCB's don't cause cancer
quote:
More than 20 studies, mostly conducted by the federal Environmental Protection Agency and National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, have failed to conclude that PCBs cause cancer in humans.
(source: http://www.junkscience.com/sep98/bergen.htm )Is there is overwhelming evidence for any of the above claims, then 99% of scientists are brainwashed fools, who seem to flaunt fact in the name of making life more difficult for everyone. I just find it a very strange coincidence that people who ideologically feel that government regulation is fundamentally bad are the only ones who seem to be able to find "X studies that show no evidence or Y being harmful and therefore unworthy of regulation."
Good science does not adhere to the T-shirt with the alien picture that says "I want to believe." People who want to believe that the Jewish people are evil and that Hitler got a bad rap cough up supposed evidence that the Holocaust didn't happen. They think themselves revisionists clearing away emotion from history and exposing the cold hard facts. They aren't. Junk history.
Cato want to believe that the government is lying to us and a society free from government regulation of both business and personal choices is supported by science. They think themselves Newtons and Copernicuses and Gallileos and Darwins saving humanity for the evil stupidity of Plato and Aristotle. They aren't. Junk science.
To quote Omega, "these guys have no credibility."
--------------------
"I was surprised by the matter-of-factness of Kafka's narration, and the subtle humor present as a result." (Sizer 2005)
Printer-friendly view of this topic
