Friday, September 04, 2020

Nobel Prize winners' support for Biden proves their madness

Br sent me this list of 81 U.S. science Nobel Prize candidates who have already endorsed Biden. From some broader perspective, it's unspectacular because they also represent the huge left-wing bias of the scholarly institutions. They're not just "good scientists"; they are results of the selection that has (from the 1960s or so) demanded the people to be a mixture of "scientists" and "mindless Stalinist and Maoist fanatics", with the increasing importance assigned to the latter.

However, the fact that they did throw this support for the mentally deteriorrating puppet of the most destructive forces now, in 2020, is particularly troubling.


The ultimate guru of many U.S. scientists is crisply revealing the deepest and most perfectionist discovery about the coronavirus.

When I looked more carefully, I realized that I know more than ten of them in person. Starting from the most familiar ones to me, the first four are probably Gilbert, Glashow, Gross, Wilczek. Given the overrepresentation of these four in my perspective, it's likely that with some weight, more than 1/2 of the winners whom I know are subscribed here. The notable absences may be more interesting, e.g. Steven Weinberg.



The short letter says that it's more important than ever to support a candidate who is pro-science and pro-immigration. Wow. They must live in a completely different galaxy. First, "pro-science" and "pro-immigration" pretty much contradict each other in the U.S. today (and a January 2020 explanation of the contradiction will be mentioned soon). The largest group of immigrants are Mexicans who don't really contribute to the U.S. science much – one might say that their increasing numbers erode what makes a "science hub" the U.S. of America better than a "not so science hub" the United States of Mexico.



But 2020 was surely the best year so far to show how utterly unscientific the U.S. Democratic Party actually is when it comes to their policies and even their ideas about how policies should be determined and which opinions should be propagated. Return to January and February. The U.S. Democratic Party was still full of gr@tenist ideas such as the Green New Deal, as if 0.015 °C of apparent warming per year in recent years were a huge problem for mankind that justifies a 400% increase of energy prices.

Suddenly, the virus arrived. The U.S. Democratic Party generally attacked Donald Trump who instinctively – and very reasonably – stopped the travel to the U.S., in order to see what is going on and how serious it was. Trump clearly embraced the appropriate caution, the Democrats didn't: they placed the "support for immigration" above the virus that was going to become their main deity soon afterwards. Within weeks, it was clear to everybody that the "fear of the coronavirus" was vastly exceeding the "fear of climate change" and similar dumb superstitions that the Democrats were previously promoting. Nevertheless, the Democrats only continued to do harmful things. So in some coalition with the WHO and others, they were spreading the idea that the face masks didn't have an impact on the propagation of an infectious respiratory disease. If you remember this attitude that they mindlessly adopted – and I remember it very well (because we had mandatory face masks since March 18th and most Czechs were sort of shocked that other nations didn't do the same) – it is just stunning to realize that they're the same Democrats who treat people as criminals if they don't have face masks today (when it's already clear that the face masks aren't really necessary because the overall damages caused by the disease are small and can't really be permanently avoided).

Their recommendations were equally harmful when it came to drugs, vaccines, and lockdowns, too. Even now, while they claim that Covid-19 is very serious, they are doing everything they can to slow down or stop the advances of the vaccines (many of which are totally ready to be distributed to those who want them, as far as I can say). But of course, the most devastating example of the fanatically anti-scientific reasoning was the lockdown, a policy that quickly became a symbol of the U.S. Democratic Party while the Republicans have wanted to end it soon.

Sweden was the example of a country that actually followed policies that were designed by competent scientists, starting with Anders Tegnell. And indeed, the best recommendation has always been to "do nothing". So Sweden told people to socially distance themselves if they find it fit but there were no mandatory restrictions affecting the whole nation and there was no mandatory shutdown of businesses (which has never helped any nation). You should study the Swedish Covid statistics page if you haven't done so.

In total, Sweden has recorded 85,000 people with a positive Covid test which led to 5832 deaths with Covid. Sweden has never adopted a "hysterical mass testing of tons of healthy people", either, so the number 85,000 is a tiny fraction of the people who have struggled with the virus; undoubtedly several million Swedes have antibodies by now. Surely a small part of those 5832 deaths are deaths "primarily because of" Covid. At any rate, as Tegnell knew it would happen, they reached the herd immunity (which wasn't the primary "goal" but it was largely an unavoidable side effect of the Swedish plan). The number of cases was 100-200 in recent days, well below Czechia's 250-700 per day, and they're already below 1 death per day in average, below 1-3 in Czechia. The disease has simply circulated, ran out of the vulnerable people, and statistically stopped due to herd immunity.

Tegnell knew it would happen, I knew it would happen. Every scientifically competent person knew that it would happen. Herd immunity is a matter of common sense and this disease has been known to be comparable to regular flu at least from late February. Diseases that are spreding this quickly simply do hit the limits within two months or so. The U.S. Democratic Party became a great example of the totally unscientific, irrational panic porn that was deliberately growing medieval superstitions and downright hysteria among many people. Janet Daley has explained that the Britons have largely succumbed to the medieval superstitions, too, and so did all the other English-speaking nations and most others.

The problem isn't just the fact that pretty much every single statement and recommendation that the U.S. Democratic Party proposed were the opposite of the truth. The even bigger problem is that they totally rejected the scientific methodology to get these answers. It is spectacularly clear that none of the people who were spreading the Democratic memes and policies was doing a proper scientific work. The political goals – the dream to damage the United States of America was the first one – were clearly primary and the people with PhD degress, the "scientists", played the role of the pseudointellectual sluts. And the U.S. Democratic Party has openly adopted the policy of bullying the scientists (and everyone else) and spreading "their truth" by brute force. This is a big No, No, No, this approach just isn't compatible with the scientific method.

Feynman has discussed the scientific integrity in his 1974 Caltech commencement speech, the Cargo Cult Science. All of it is relevant but the directly relevant paragraph is one about the drilling:
I say that’s also important in giving certain types of government advice. Supposing a senator asked you for advice about whether drilling a hole should be done in his state; and you decide it would he better in some other state. If you don’t publish such a result, it seems to me you’re not giving scientific advice. You’re being used. If your answer happens to come out in the direction the government or the politicians like, they can use it as an argument in their favor; if it comes out the other way, they don’t publish it at all. That’s not giving scientific advice.
That was exactly happening to the Democratic Party's and deep state's "scientific experts" in the U.S., too. The conclusions were predetermined and the "useful scientists" who were ready to say "what was needed" were just found and quoted as cheap sluts who provide a dirty lying politician or a toxic activist with a cover. They weren't really giving a scientific advise. The whole process has been completely corrupt. These "scientists" have either never been real scientists or they ceased to be ones when they were used in this way.

There were way too many examples of the total denial of the basic principles of science – academic freedom, scientific integrity – by the "scientists" working for the Democratic Party. But all these deeply harmful activities are continuing even now, in September 2020 when it's already spectacularly clear that this whole hysteria was just a huge mass neurosis and the disease is no different from a strain of flu. And hundreds of millions of regular people have perfectly understood this basic point by now. That's also why the beaches in Rio are completely full by now (and by their very presence, these people are screaming that Jair Bolsonaro has always been completely right about the little flu, despite having no Nobel Prize). It is just stupid to hide from a flu virus for a year or years and it ultimately cannot help, anyway. So how does the Democratic Party want to support science now?

It pretty much wants to shut down the schools (or a big portion of them) because there is nothing more pro-scientific than to "educate" children according to Tarzan's template. Or they want to replace the schooling by the remote online schooling and seminars that clearly don't work – or their efficiency is lower at least by 80% than in the case of the regular schooling and seminars. They are justifying these insane proposals by contrived, indirect, hypothetical threats for the kids or their relatives.

If you look at the histograms of the Czech Covid, you will see that out of the 426 deaths with Covid so far, ZERO occurred among the people younger than 25 years; 1 woman and 0 men died in the 25-34 age group. Children (and even regular-age college students) are not threatened at all. Can't their grandmas catch it? Well, even the answer to this question seems to be mostly "no" according to some actual research. Almost no one has contracted Covid-19 from a child. But even if it were "yes", it's a very indirect link and the disease will clearly kill fewer people if the resilient group (such as mostly healthy children) will represent a larger part of the subset of a nation that is needed for herd immunity.

So the more the kids are exposed to Covid-19, the more seniors' lives' will be saved! This is undoubtedly what the science actually says. But the U.S. Democratic Party is among those forces that deliberately obfuscate this scientific fact (or a mathematical tautology) and many others and that deliberately spread lies and hysteria that directly contradict the basic scientific and mathematical reasoning.

And now 81 Nobel Prize winners arrive and tell you that the Biden's party (that is shutting down schools, screaming at scientists and other people to accept the only holy truth that cannot be even debated, and that wants the whole nations to give away medieval scapegoats and multi-trillion sacrifices for no gain) represents the pro-science attitude? Wow. Your chutzpah is just stunning, Gentlemen. It's always a question whether you really believe these insane statements or whether you realize that they're lies and you just find it more convenient for yourself personally to help these lies to propagate. In both cases, it's incredibly worrisome. It's terrible that people who have been able to do the ultimate world class quality science can turn out to be so complete idiots or unhinged fascists when it comes to a topic that is just slightly outside their field of expertise.

And I could have discussed the racist "Black Lives Matter" riots in which the Democratic Party, a clear supporter of BLM, has abandoned the last traces of fairness because only the criminals are supposed to have the civil rights while e.g. law-abiding Christians "must" be stripped even of their basic religious freedoms. Is that also pro-science? Is it pro-science to say that it's racist when a white doesn't kneel in front of a black? Is it scientific to rewrite the history and claimed that the U.S. wasn't founded by white Founding Fathers? And hundreds of such questions emerge every damn day.

At any rate, you will be defeated because most Americans aren't this messed up when it comes to rather fundamental political issues and your comrades' surveys are even more inaccurate and biased against Donald Trump than they were in 2016 (partly because someone is always making the results look more pro-Democratic than they are; and especially because you have escalated the atmosphere of fear in which an incredibly large fraction of Americans is afraid of publicly pointing out that Trump got these things right while you are absolutely full of šit, so they don't even think that they have the freedom to safely say that they will vote for Trump). You have completely lost the ability or desire to look at the world sensibly, fairly, rationally, and scientifically, and to collect accurate enough data about the world. Trump will win – and he will probably win in a landslide. And he will deservedly win – also because he is a far better scientist when it comes to the everyday life challenges than all of you are.

No comments:

Post a Comment