Category Archives: Science

Trump Administration Finally Pulls the Plug on the Climate Fear Factory

Article by Charles Rotter.

The long-overdue showdown with America’s most bloated, self-important arm of climate alarmism finally arrived this week — and what a spectacle it was. In a move that should have happened years ago, the Trump administration decisively dismissed the hundreds of so-called “experts” who were preparing the next National Climate Assessment (NCA) — a document often weaponized to justify costly and draconian climate policies that the American people neither asked for nor benefit from.

Continue reading here.

The Overpopulation Fallacy: Why More People Means More Knowledge and Prosperity

Article by Amir Iraji.

For decades, the dominant narrative surrounding population growth has been one of alarm. Thinkers like Malthus warned that population growth would cause mass starvation and ecological collapse. Ehrlich’s 1968 book The Population Bomb famously predicted that hundreds of millions of people would starve in the 1970s due to overpopulation.

Today, concerns are shifting. Many of the same governments that once feared overpopulation are now worried about declining birth rates. Countries like Japan, South Korea, and much of Europe struggle with economic stagnation and aging populations. Even China—after enforcing its coercive One-Child Policy—is now encouraging larger families. This shift raises an important question: where did the fear of overpopulation come from, and was it ever justified?

Continue reading here.

The vindication of a heretic

Article by Brendan O’Neill.

Excerpts:

Jay Bhattacharya is right: ‘scientism’ is a menace to truth and liberty.

But Bhattacharya’s mission is less one of personal vengeance than of scientific restoration. He told his hearing that he wants to bring back ‘the very essence of science’ to the NIH. And what might that be? ‘Dissent’, he said.

[. . .]

That we scientists found ourselves in the position of telling the masses they ‘shouldn’t be saying goodbye to [their] grandfather as he’s dying in a hospital’ was awful, he said. What we should have done is say ‘Here’s what the risks are’, and then let people decide whether to take them.

[. . .]

That we scientists found ourselves in the position of telling the masses they ‘shouldn’t be saying goodbye to [their] grandfather as he’s dying in a hospital’ was awful, he said. What we should have done is say ‘Here’s what the risks are’, and then let people decide whether to take them.