Rush Limbaugh Makes The Connection

Now we know why he is right 99% of the time. Rush Limbaugh nails it in one by comparing anthropogenic climate change/global warming and whatever it's going to be called next, to the big tobacco scandal in the 90's.

And they both tie in to manipulating the research data.

When is science not science, even though the methods may be sound? When the data is being withheld from other researchers and the data is manipulated to support a preconceived notion, or to make something out to be not as bad as it really is.

On his radio show yesterday, America's truth detector and Doctor of Democracy played this exchange between the leftist, state run media hack Andrea Mitchell and Congressman Ed Markey:

MARKEY:  The evidence is overwhelming.  There are a few people who are still fighting it in the same way that there were people still fighting the science of whether or not tobacco caused lung cancer but we could not rely upon that small minority when the overwhelmingly majority said the fumes in human beings were killing them in the same way that we new see that the fumes going into the atmosphere is having a dramatically negative impact on our planet.

This is why you should always know at least a little of our current history. By comparing the climate change hoax to big tobacco, Markey unwittingly committed the weak analogy logical fallacy and Rush caught it (emphasis added):

RUSH:  That's their new argument.  Now they're trying to compare these two things when there's no comparison.  If you want a comparison to tobacco companies, I brilliantly came up with this last week.  What nailed the tobacco companies?  What was it?  Remember when the CEOs of Big Tobacco were up testifying and it was discovered that they had lied about their research. They had lied about the impact of smoking on health. They had made up studies which showed that there was no connection to smoking and respiratory health and heart disease, and they had lied about it.  And when the lie had been uncovered there was a whistle-blower that went on 60 Minutes, sat behind the black screen, blew the whistle and that was the end of it.

This is the crux of the matter behind the anthropogenic climate change hoax, not the science, which is sound, but, the manipulation of said data from the science. Science demands that evidence be verifiable and results be reproducible in the real world, not ten, fifty or a hundred years into the future; unless you have a time machine that everyone is unaware of. Data should also be freely shared between other scientists and not forced to use the FOIA to get it.

We now know, thanks to a whistle blower who leaked emails and program code, that the climate data was being manipulated by top climate scientists at East Anglia's Hadley Climate Research Unit. Just like researchers did to make it look like cigarette smoke was not the cause or played a role in lung cancer.


And the science is never settled. They come to a general agreement, but, scientists always leave room to change that agreement should any new evidence be found and all it takes is one person to do it.


This is the danger of conducting research, using the scientific method, when there is a preconceived notion. What happens, because scientists are human too, is that evidence is being sought out to support the preconceived notion and any evidence, no matter how overwhelming it refutes, is almost always discarded, hidden or destroyed.

Read the entire transcript here: Markey on Climate and Tobacco; Hoaxer Hansen Does Letterman