Posted by
rycK on Friday, October 19, 2007 10:42:02 AM
The Political Hoax and Other Follies Such as Global Warming
We need to examine, critically, the notion of hoaxes and their utility in politics and science and structure some political response as to how they originated, but more importantly, how they influence certain political outcomes by the work of those perpetrators who construct such monstrosities. As always, politics is based on persuasion—not fact as we shall see below:
From the past we can identify such famous hoaxes as The Ems Dispatch[1], The Protocols of the Elders of Zion[2], Margaret Mead’s crude racist political stunt Coming of Age in Samoa [3], the startling record finish of the Boston Marathon runner Rosie Ruiz Vivas[4], The Priory of Sion[5] , Global Warming and the recent article published in frontpagemag.com: Who Hates Americans? We Do.
Manyof these hoaxes produced political or personal sensations, financial rewards, started wars, legitimized Anti-Semitism or other pressures against certain groups, projected political views into certain cultures, produced a champion athlete who used bus to aid her running skills, gave accounts of a secret society and have convinced millions of the demise of the Earth.
The recent flyer seen circulated in several universities entitled Who Hates Americans? We Do. [6] fits into the political hoax category. The question we always ponder on the hoax mechanism is this: who benefits from this falsification of circumstances or facts?? A review of previous hoaxes shows that millions of people were to believe, and still do, the phony newspaper reports of Walter Duranty [7], the political propagandist and stooge for the Soviets and a celebrated Pulitzer Prize winner for the New York Times. The fact that he published lies has little to do with his success in influencing the far left wing in America in their fervid support of Marxism. Similarly, the disgusting prejudice, bigotry and intolerance of certain social and religious values detested by Margaret Mead as she provided ‘proof’ that:
"She emphatically criticized the neurosis-inducing nuclear family, including the stress of Christian monogamy, and used her Samoan material to demonstrate an alternative to premarital chastity..."[8]
and her phony, political conclusions are still celebrated as a foundation in cultural studies. Mead is highly regarded as some wondrous pillar of authority in academic circles by those who seek to attack basic American culture. She will be surpassed in beauty and acclaim only by the discoverer of the gay gene, when that happens, and it will. This is both a political necessity and a political certainty.
Following all this we must include the Global Warming Hoax as a construct strictly conforming to the classic definition of the hoax and skirting the usual scientific precepts employed to examine such wild claims. Al Gore has assembled a group of people [read stooges in some cases] who attest to some impending climatic holocaust and has ignored, even suppressed any contradiction of his claims. People who even attempt to question his ‘findings’ and obvious propaganda are subjected to the most acute ridicule by the media, such as the New York Times. Those who would impede capitalism, which includes the PRC, India and most of the third world, are wildly enthusiastic about restraining growth in the US, hence the political basis for this hoax. Here the usual scientific rational criteria that are most necessary to support, compare and define scientific conclusions are summarily dismissed in an emotional political comportment characteristic of the hoax phenomenon. Al Gore and his politicos employ blatant pseudoscience, which is defined as “…any body of knowledge, methodology, belief, or practice that claims to be scientific or is made to appear scientific, but does not adhere to the basic requirements of the scientific method.[9]” We must note, with some concern, that so-called ‘scientists’ and ‘authorities’ support the Global Warming Hoax with ‘data’ that cannot stand the examination and tolerate free discussions of the scientific data and basis [10]:
[1] Use of vague, exaggerated or untestable claims
[2] Assertion of scientific claims that are vague rather than precise, and that lack specific measurements.
[3] Failure to make use of operational definitions. (i.e. a scientific description of the operational means in which a range of numeric measurements can be obtained).[24]
[4] Failure to make reasonable use of the principle of parsimony.
[5] Use of obscurantist language, and misuse of apparently technical jargon in an effort to give claims the superficial trappings of science.
[6] Lack of boundary conditions: Most well-supported scientific theories possess boundary conditions (well articulated limitations) under which the predicted phenomena do and do not apply.
[7] Lack of effective controls in experimental design.
Here, items [1], [2], [6] and [7] are seen to properly characterize the Global Warming Hoax as pseudoscience. We can correctly ask:
Where is the source for the ideal mean temperature of the Earth and how is it measured? What is the standard error in such measurements?
How do you measure the mean temp? Select certain cities and average the readings?
Why do satellites no show a significant increase in temperature in the upper atmosphere?
What are the effects of sun spot activity on the heat radiated upon the Earth?
How do you identify and confirm cyclic phenomena in weather patters and relate them to temperature trends?
Their data set is essentially all political and insufficient to demonstrate their claims. They substitute emotion in place of scant and insufficient experimental results and demand chauvinistic belief in their wild claims and ardently suppress criticism of their implausible conclusions. Do they really use tree rings to ‘correct’ temperature readings from the last century? This is classic hoax mechanism disguised as science that employs pseudoscience in its most elegant form. We can expect such from politicians.
Never the less, millions believe this phony political circus.
When the FrontPagemag article[11] was featured on a Townhall blog [12] by this blogger the result was a firm disbelief in the political attributes of this hoax and resulted in dismissal of the authenticity by some and a refutation by others[13]. My guess was that this flyer was proffered by the far left. The response to the wording of the flyer by Lord Upright, however, is classic leftist rhetoric and amplifies the nature and basis of this piece and tends to support my tentative view. His mechanical response highlights the standard leftist views on the pejorative words and themes in the flyer and gives us some proof that it is a political tool and probably leftist in origin. The fact that it may be, or is, a hoax is subordinate to the political objectives here, and parallels the phony support for Global Warming and its attendant Nobel War Prize. It is not known who wrote or circulated this paper, but it had the hallmarks of a political hoax and the comments and fluff and foam associated with placing this on the Internet had predictable results. It worked. The liberals were properly outraged as expected.
The Who Hates Americans? We Do piece is classic example of propaganda and the political players have responded to it as predicted. Puppets and sausage machines work in this fashion. It was designed to be divisive, offer a signal clarion call to those from the far left or far right for a vigorous and noisy response and many performed in the expected political left-liberal or far-right fashion. The public is apparently too ignorant of politics to venture beyond their fears and prejudices to critically examine the FrontPage article, the War on Terrorism , Global Warming, that Hillary Clinton is “The Smartest Women in the World,[14]” the success of capitalism or much else.
What else is new in politics?? Nothing: Same old same old. Walter Duranty, Uncle Joe Stalin, FDR and Margaret Meade would have been proud. Al Gore is ecstatic.
Propaganda works: Read the New York Times for proof.
rycK
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ems_Dispatch
[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Protocols_of_the_Elders_of_Zion
[3] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coming_of_Age_in_Samoa
[4] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosie_Ruiz
[5] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Priory_of_Sion
[7] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walter_Duranty
[8] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coming_of_Age_in_Samoa
[9] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pseudoscience
[10] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pseudoscience#Use_of_vague.2C_exaggerated_or_untestable_claims
[14] No reference on this one other that the utter absurdity of this claim is self-defining.