Yes, there is a definite disadvantage that the global warming fraudsters have next to the antitobacco fraudsters: we have satellite photographs and thermometers.
This piece from Newsmax tells us that all the ice is back on the polar caps (actually on the southern one it is uncommonly abundant), and that record low temperatures have been registered in Jerusalem, Damascus, Amman, northern Saudi Arabia, China, Central Asia and so on. The piece rightfully concludes: “If global warming gets any worse we’ll all freeze to death.”
That, of course, will not change the position of the global warming ideologues an iota, for the issue of actual planetary warming is, for them, as detached from science as real public health is from antitobacco. In both cases, it is a matter of control – and of showing who in is charge, who really pulls the strings of the political and institutional marionettes in today’s regulatory circus. So, nonsense like Kyoto and the EU greenhouse gases reduction program (both should be renamed UWID – Unilateral Western Industrial Disarmament) will go on undisturbed along the path of global economic bankruptcy and consequent social destruction.
Yet, the everyday citizen is able to see from his own thermometer (and feel on his skin) the particularly cold temperatures we are going though, and he will spontaneously question the global warming fraudsters and their gloomy predictions in spite of the propaganda.
That is not so, unfortunately, for the antitobacco fraud. Although the attributions of disease causality by antitobacco to cigarettes are just as scientifically unsound (and lunatic) as those of global warming are to cars and industries, nevertheless the layman does not have the same immediate means of verification. Furthermore, cancer and other diseases DO develop, usually late in life, and people DO die because of them. The issue is: what single element or combination of elements causes them, and how long does it take? If a smoker who has fallen victim of propaganda quits smoking today and develops cancer in five years, for example, his cancer will be attributed to smoking on the sheer basis that he smoked.
The great advantage that the antitobacco fraudsters have is, therefore, the time lag – and the fact that there will always be a large number of interacting co-factors that will allow attributions to the latest and greatest political/marketing target of the moment.
Let us make an example for absolute clarity. To establish empirically that smoking causes cancer everybody should quit today – and we mean zero cigarettes consumed – and wait 30 or 40 years. If it is true that “smoking is the largest preventable cause of cancer” as the chant goes, then in the year 2040 or so we should see drastic decreases in cancer incidence. That’s not all, though, for global smoking cessation alone certainly would not be enough: everything else should freeze – pollution, diet, stress levels, chemicals, habits in general and a million other things should stay exactly as they are for 30 or 40 years to have a reliable measure. That, of course, is impossible.
So, even if everybody hypothetically stopped smoking today and waited 30 years, the "public health" shysters still could not be nailed regardless of the outcome of the experiment. The reason is simple. If the number of cancers would decrease, they would say that their “attributions of causality” were correct, and ignore the other millions of possible combinations of co-factors that could have induced the reduction. If the number of cancers would increase (or stay the same) they would simply change the attributions to some other fantasy culprit, create a great deal of hysteria and implicitly maintain that smoking was indeed a cause of cancer! Who would pay attention to the fact that it was not 30 years earlier, anyway?…
That is why multifactorial epidemiology not only is trash science, but an exceedingly dangerous tool to impose political will while bypassing democracy. It also constitutes a guarantee of immunity and lavish earnings for the professionals of the fraud. In short: as long as this type of epidemiology is considered "science" and it is the base of public policies, fraud pays.
And that is why the issue of lifestyle epidemiology is to be destabilized legally and especially politically. Such junk science is the very opposite of real science. It must be made illegal that public money is spent on multifactorial epidemiological “studies”, and it should be illegal for this junk science to be the base of any and all national and international public policies.
Global warming, global cooling, smoking "kills," trans-fats "kill," whatever they say, we are supposed to listen, for the Master Race is superior and knows all. We know better. Junk science is demented and evil and its practitioners are the same.
0 Comments