Timothy Birdnow

Question; how do you have science if you start with a preconception, and then deny the results if they contradict that conception? You don't have science at all but rather superstition. This is the basis of astrology or spirit guides or studying chicken bones; it is based on faith and not reason.

What do you have when large amounts of money are involved in any enterprise? You have cheating, fudging, and outright corruption. It is as inevitable as the sun rising; where large amounts of money are concerned people frequently lose their ethical standards.

What do you have when government is funding research that they hope to use to grab more money and power? You have, well, this.

From the Free Press Standard:

"A three-year study by the University of Cincinnati in Carroll and surrounding counties determined hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, has no effect on groundwater in the Utica shale region, is not being released to the public.

Dr. Amy Townsend-Small, the lead researcher for the University of Cincinnati Department of Geology, released the results during the Feb. 4 meeting of the Carroll County Concerned Citizens in Carrollton.

During her presentation, which was videotaped and is available for viewing on YouTube, Townsend-Small stated, "We haven’t seen anything to show that wells have been contaminated by fracking.”
Rex Well March 14 WEB

A three-year study by the University of Cincinnati in Carroll and surrounding counties determined hydraulic fracturing of oil and gas wells like the Rex Energy well shown above, does not contaminate ground water.

When asked at that meeting if the university planned to publicize the results, Dr. Amy Townsend-Small, an assistant professor at the University of Cincinnati Department of Geology and the leader of the study, said there were no plans to do so.

"I am really sad to say this, but some of our funders, the groups that had given us funding in the past, were a little disappointed in our results. They feel that fracking is scary and so they were hoping this data could to a reason to ban it,” she said."

End excerpt.

It's good that Dr. Townsend-Small is scientist enough to admit that her findings contradicted the environmentalist meme and that they were burying the study out of pure commercial motives, but what does that say for the state of research in modern America?

When government took over the funding for most research in this country a fundamental change occured in science. Now instead of following where Nature leads we ask what the paymaster wants and then tailor our science to that. Government wants to restrict energy usage, to push people into higher density living arrangements and reduce the standard of living (based on the Agenda 21 agreements) and so we are told that hydraulic fracturing is deadly, deadly deadly! Why? America is down to a scant 13% importation of foreign fuels thanks to this technique, which has made us independent of the Middle Eastern Islamic radicals. But this also means no solar, no wind, no CONSERVATION which has been a cornerstone of the environmentalist movemment since the 1970's, so it must not be allowed to stand. The elites decided that energy would be the way to stitch the world together into a horrible geoopolitical Frankenstein's monster, that the path to world government would be paved with solar cells. The Endangered Atmospheres Conference hatched up the scheme of Global Warming, to use hte atmosphere to justify empowering world organizations. This is what many of the elites want, and both political parties in America have pursued this for a variety of reasons. If nothing else it means money in the pockets of politicians. The universities have gone along with Global Warming because it means lots of Federal dollars as well as money from rich foundations like the Rockefellar or Ford Foundations. It created a gravy train for them, and they have tailored their research to provide ammunition, not actually do science.

If you doubt that then why is Michael Mann still employed at Penn State?He was caught red-handed fudging data, yet he's still there, still fuding data, still collecting a nice salary. We have e-mails with the Hadley Center proving he pulled a fast one "Mike's Nature Trick" meant he spliced completely different data sets together because he had to "hide the decline" in temperatures that the real data showed. He's still working because he brings in the money.

So now we have one more piece of evidence showing that the scientific establishment is corrupted. Is it any surprise?

The person who pays is the boss. Science is little more than a high priced call girl in a white lab coat.

Hat tip; Thomas Lifson

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 08:18 AM | Comments (8) | Add Comment
Post contains 794 words, total size 5 kb.