Progressives Pretend That they Follow "The Science"

Progressives like to pretend that they only follow "the science" and that skeptics (i.e Republicans/Conservatives) are nothing more than greedy "deniers" interested in only furthering their monetary interests.

The movie "Pressure" has been cited as one example. It tells the story of the meteorologist responsible for advising Dwight Eisenhower during the run-up to D-Day. In it, he and Eisenhower (a good Republican) delay the Normandy invasion by one day to provide a chance for better weather on June 6th rather than June 5th. I am summarizing since I have not seen the movie. However, anyone who reads the actual history will find that the science was decidedly "unsettled" at the time. Stagg, the meteorologist, headed a team that included both British and American meteorologists and actually incorporated 3 different weather services. At least one other service thought June 5th was still viable. There was a difference of "opinion" as to which forecast was more accurate - the one calling for the invasion to move forward on June 5th or the one calling for June 6th.

In short, Eisenhower made his decision based more on hope rather than "settled" science.

Which brings me to my next point. Nothing is dearer to the hearts of Progressives than pushing apocalyptic scenarios concerning climate change. Again, any skeptic is shamed and name called as a "denier." The science is "settled" they claim.

However, interestingly, the last couple of months have seen a retreat even by the most crazy progressives. The Wall Street Journal published an editorial by its editorial board titled "A Climate Retraction for the Ages" on December 5th last year. I will just include quotes from the editorial:

"One scandal of our age is the attempt to sell the public on the narrative of climate catastrophe. It’s been fed by the press and overheated political and scientific claims that sometimes are phony. That’s the story with the journal Nature’s retraction of a highly publicized climate study that made headlines.

"The study had so many errors that Nature has now retracted it, but what an embarrassment. “Post-publication, the results were found to be sensitive to the removal of one country, Uzbekistan, where inaccuracies were noted in the underlying economic data for the period 1995–1999,” the retraction says."

The Journal concludes:

"If progressives want to know why so many Americans don’t believe claims of the climate apocalypse, it’s because so much of climate science has been shown to be unbelievable."

Progressives have perfected the use of Saul Alinsky's "Rules for Radicals". Rule 3: "Whenever possible, go outside the expertise of the enemy. Look for ways to increase insecurity, anxiety and uncertainty." Rule 5: "Ridicule is man's most potent weapon. There is no defense."

Keep that in mind when progressives try to control the narrative.