I am not a fan of singer-songwriter Tom Waits, only because I am musically “challenged.” But he has some great sayings, one of which came to mind as I glumly read the second paragraph of the preamble to Bill C-50, also known as the Sustainable Jobs Act.."Most people don't care if you're telling them the truth or if you’re telling them a lie, as long as they’re entertained by it.".In the realm of lies, Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn always provides reliable quotations as well,."In our country, the lie has become not just a moral category but a pillar of the state.".Here are the offending words from the preamble to Bill C-50 which set off this train of thought:."Whereas the Paris Agreement acknowledges the need for an effective and progressive response to the urgent threat of climate change on the basis of the best available scientific knowledge and recognizes the imperative of the creation of decent work and quality jobs consistent with Canada’s nationally determined contribution....".None of the statements in this paragraph are objectively true. They are assertions born of an ideology that scorns the scientific method upon which they triumphantly, if illegitimately, sit..Five years ago scientist extraordinaire Greta Thunberg announced that we are doomed. As Jonathan Bradley recently reported, we have just passed the five-year period after which, according to Ms. Thunberg, we must all die. Clearly, we have not all died, so how urgent is the threat?.Is the policy based on the best available scientific knowledge? There are few more profitable ways to spend an afternoon than browsing the archives of FriendsofScience.org. The “science”, as is abundantly clear from this aggregation of peer-reviewed studies, is highly controvertible and there is certainly no consensus about much of anything deemed by the Government of Canada to be settled climate science..The government wants to create decent work and quality jobs consistent with Canada’s nationally determined contribution..But, contribution to what? If it is to the reduction of worldwide carbon dioxide emissions, then are we to conclude that the quality jobs must be consistent with our 1.8 percent contribution to such emissions? .If so then, prepare yourself for some crappy jobs because our government has set a very low bar for itself..The remaining clauses of Bill C-50 are no more erudite than the opening paragraphs and I am not going to bore you with more description. But how could they be informative or useful? The entire legislation is built upon an immoral and untrue premise of national consensus and impending doom. We, like the Soviets before us, have allowed our legislative pillars to rest on a body of lies. What could possibly go wrong?.Some years ago, I returned to university to pursue an advanced degree and was pleased beyond measure when my research data showed unmistakable correlations that supported my hypothesis. When I expressed relief and delight, one of my thesis committee members rightly and sternly addressed my apparent lack of commitment to the scientific method. Correlation does not equal causation and all that. It was a lesson well learned..And so it is with the issue of climate change and its causes. If I must radically change my lifestyle due to a scientifically demonstrated and imminent threat of catastrophic climate change then I will be grumpy but compliant. However, the distortion of science in the pursuit of a false ideology is not something that demands my compliance..Respect for the scientific method and its use in the pursuit of truth is too historically and existentially important to allow the petty tyrants of our current government to go unchallenged. If they want to radically change our society and civilization so that they can make more money at the expense of my well being, then they should have the courage to say so. But they must not be allowed to pervert science and then hide behind its withered battlements. That is not on..No doubt the government will get its action plans, ministerial reports and partnership councils as described in the legislation. No doubt there will be many brave statements and proud declarations of “Canada’s contribution.” But remember when you see and read such statements; until the government is willing to allow a full debate on the broad panoply of uncherry-picked scientific data, their statements are based on a lie. And if we are willing to allow our legislation to be built on such lies, then I guess we have the government we deserve..The premiers of Alberta and Saskatchewan have said that their governments will oppose the imposition of legislation which makes gauzy legislative baubles like the Sustainable Jobs Act necessary. Their willingness to fight is of some comfort. I suggest they consider fighting that battle on the solid firmament of a scientific search for truth. I am sick of the lies used to destroy the integrity of science itself.
I am not a fan of singer-songwriter Tom Waits, only because I am musically “challenged.” But he has some great sayings, one of which came to mind as I glumly read the second paragraph of the preamble to Bill C-50, also known as the Sustainable Jobs Act.."Most people don't care if you're telling them the truth or if you’re telling them a lie, as long as they’re entertained by it.".In the realm of lies, Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn always provides reliable quotations as well,."In our country, the lie has become not just a moral category but a pillar of the state.".Here are the offending words from the preamble to Bill C-50 which set off this train of thought:."Whereas the Paris Agreement acknowledges the need for an effective and progressive response to the urgent threat of climate change on the basis of the best available scientific knowledge and recognizes the imperative of the creation of decent work and quality jobs consistent with Canada’s nationally determined contribution....".None of the statements in this paragraph are objectively true. They are assertions born of an ideology that scorns the scientific method upon which they triumphantly, if illegitimately, sit..Five years ago scientist extraordinaire Greta Thunberg announced that we are doomed. As Jonathan Bradley recently reported, we have just passed the five-year period after which, according to Ms. Thunberg, we must all die. Clearly, we have not all died, so how urgent is the threat?.Is the policy based on the best available scientific knowledge? There are few more profitable ways to spend an afternoon than browsing the archives of FriendsofScience.org. The “science”, as is abundantly clear from this aggregation of peer-reviewed studies, is highly controvertible and there is certainly no consensus about much of anything deemed by the Government of Canada to be settled climate science..The government wants to create decent work and quality jobs consistent with Canada’s nationally determined contribution..But, contribution to what? If it is to the reduction of worldwide carbon dioxide emissions, then are we to conclude that the quality jobs must be consistent with our 1.8 percent contribution to such emissions? .If so then, prepare yourself for some crappy jobs because our government has set a very low bar for itself..The remaining clauses of Bill C-50 are no more erudite than the opening paragraphs and I am not going to bore you with more description. But how could they be informative or useful? The entire legislation is built upon an immoral and untrue premise of national consensus and impending doom. We, like the Soviets before us, have allowed our legislative pillars to rest on a body of lies. What could possibly go wrong?.Some years ago, I returned to university to pursue an advanced degree and was pleased beyond measure when my research data showed unmistakable correlations that supported my hypothesis. When I expressed relief and delight, one of my thesis committee members rightly and sternly addressed my apparent lack of commitment to the scientific method. Correlation does not equal causation and all that. It was a lesson well learned..And so it is with the issue of climate change and its causes. If I must radically change my lifestyle due to a scientifically demonstrated and imminent threat of catastrophic climate change then I will be grumpy but compliant. However, the distortion of science in the pursuit of a false ideology is not something that demands my compliance..Respect for the scientific method and its use in the pursuit of truth is too historically and existentially important to allow the petty tyrants of our current government to go unchallenged. If they want to radically change our society and civilization so that they can make more money at the expense of my well being, then they should have the courage to say so. But they must not be allowed to pervert science and then hide behind its withered battlements. That is not on..No doubt the government will get its action plans, ministerial reports and partnership councils as described in the legislation. No doubt there will be many brave statements and proud declarations of “Canada’s contribution.” But remember when you see and read such statements; until the government is willing to allow a full debate on the broad panoply of uncherry-picked scientific data, their statements are based on a lie. And if we are willing to allow our legislation to be built on such lies, then I guess we have the government we deserve..The premiers of Alberta and Saskatchewan have said that their governments will oppose the imposition of legislation which makes gauzy legislative baubles like the Sustainable Jobs Act necessary. Their willingness to fight is of some comfort. I suggest they consider fighting that battle on the solid firmament of a scientific search for truth. I am sick of the lies used to destroy the integrity of science itself.
