Fraud

I do not know what the legal definition of ‘fraud’ is, nor can I be bothered looking it up at this time of night. But I would have thought that ANY deliberate misrepresentation of facts is ‘fraud’, if the perpetrator intends that some improper result will be achieved by the ‘fraud’. Thus, it is not just a question of ‘theft by fraud’ – it is much wider than that.

Only in recent times has ‘scientific fraud’ become a major industry. If I was Donald Trump, and I was intent upon revitalising the USA coal industry, in view of the fact that China and other countries are ignoring UN strictures about carbon emissions and thus gaining an economic advantage, I would very much want to know what the truth is. I would most certainly ignore the strictures of some academic in England who advised climatologists to ‘hide the decline’. But the mere fact that that person said that, would flash enormous red lights in my mind. I would ignore the strictures, but I would still want to know what is going on. I might set up an enquiry. But would I ask the person who said ‘hide the decline’, or any of his cronies, to head up the enquiry? Of course not! I might ask an renowned statistician, preferably  one nearing retirement.

As an aside, but indicative of what I mean, the UK Gov appointed a paediatrician to to enquire into whether plain packaging would reduce smoking prevalence. What would a paediatrician know about the statistics involved? Surely, a renowned statistician would have been far better qualified?

Politicians can be so incredibly silly, can they not? The worst person to appoint to look into climate change is a climate change expert.

So will Trump pursue Hillary C about the emails? I have a feeling that he will, but not directly. There again, if he wants to clean the Augean Stables, he should do. He should be brave. He should make it clear beyond doubt that corruption will not be tolerated in any form.

In the UK, The PM, Theresa May, must make her business to cleanse British politics. It is part of Brexit. All the globalists have to go. Academics have no place in politics. They tend to fraud and dishonesty and know that they cannot be brought to account.

But you could reasonably ask, “Who then can be trusted?” The answer is, “No one”. The reason is that ‘trust’ is not the important factor. What is important is FACTS. Did global warming ‘pause’ or did it ‘stop’? There is no doubt of the correct answer – it stopped. It stopped for as long as it stopped. When a car comes to a halt at traffic lights, it stops. It does not pause. It STOPS! There again, you could describe a pause as the description of an interval of time between events. Half-time in a football match is a pause. But the word ‘pause’ does not mean that the football match will definitely recommence. And that is the fraud perpetrated by the Climate Zealots.

It stands to reason that all these fraudsters must be banished from the UN, WHO, etc.

3 Responses to “Fraud”

  1. castello2 Says:

    https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/exxon-knew-about-climate-change-almost-40-years-ago/

Comments are closed.


%d bloggers like this: