While you’ve probably heard of the term “fake news,” which is most often used in reference to the spread of inaccurate or fabricated political rhetoric, one term that is heard less often but deserves just as much attention is “fake science.” As the name implies, fake science refers to scientific data that has been intentionally manipulated or altered in some way so as to advance a particular political agenda. If this sounds familiar, that’s because you witness it almost every time you turn on cable news or sit down inside of your college classroom; indeed, “fake science” is exactly what progressives perpetuate whenever they talk about manmade climate change.
In a recent article published on The Daily Caller, columnist David Lewis, Research Director at the Focus For Health Foundation and a former EPA scientist, called on President Trump to put an end to the “fake science” routinely being perpetuated by leftists and radical environmentalists alike.
“Trump can eliminate federal funding of data fabrication,” Lewis wrote. “It just takes putting accomplished scientists in charge, who understand both science and the federal bureaucracy from top to bottom and will do whatever is necessary.”
As Lewis argued in the preceding part of his article, the need for President Trump to take action against the federal funding of fake science is so important because of how often data on climate change is being manipulated for political purposes. “The public is largely unaware that federal agencies often engage in fabricating scientific data to support their policies and cover up any evidence whenever they screw up,” Lewis wrote, adding that the manipulation of data isn’t a practice that is solely limited to the Environmental Protection Agency or the CDC.
As proof, Lewis gave two examples. First, he pointed out how Deputy Inspector General Mary L. Kenda reported on widespread scientific misconduct last year within a U.S. Geological Survey lab in Lakewood, Colorado. At the time, Kenda argued that this data manipulation had a “serious and far ranging” impact on the credibility of the agency as a whole, which frankly should have been expected from the start.
Lewis also recalled more climate data manipulation that occurred back in 2008, when the EPA, the USDA and the University of Georgia were caught pushing false information to cover up cattle deaths linked to EPA and USDA environmental policies.
“Reversing this culture of corruption will require changing the dimensions and course of the river of federal funds flowing into pools of academic scientists willing to selectively publish data to support government policies and certain industry practices,” Lewis ultimately concluded before calling on Trump to end the spread of fake science.
Truth be told, the idea that man is contributing to rising sea levels and the warming of our planet every time he drives his Hummer to the grocery store is the biggest lie ever successfully perpetuated to the masses. (Related: The founder of the Weather Channel has told CNN that climate change is a hoax.) But the goal of the progressive left isn’t even to rally people to their cause and convince Americans that saving the environment is a battle worth having; in fact, it has nothing to do with the environment in the slightest.
Ottmar Edenhofer, lead author of the IPCC’s fourth summary report released ten years ago, let the cat out of the bag during a speech he gave in 2010, in which he admitted that climate policy is really “about how we redistribute de facto the world’s wealth.” (Related: Climate change science is exploding as it is revealed that IPCC climate models have been wrong all along.)
In this way, all of the climate change propaganda that the liberals are constantly spewing out has more to do with economics and the size of government than anything else. The idea that human beings are contributing to earth’s destruction is nothing more than a vehicle the progressives use to implement their totalitarian agenda. The sooner Americans wake up to this fact, and the more that President Trump does to stop it, the better.