Is it now considered okay for science to be corrupt?


Read that question again, but carefully. It’s not about whether it’s corrupt, we always knew an element of that was forever there, but whether that’s now considered to be acceptable, and I suppose as a corollary, acceptable to scientists themselves. Know wot I mean Guv? Wink, wink, nod, nod, say no more. Par for the course, part of the game, same ole same ole, yet another bunch of snake oil salesmen selling their wares.

Call me old, call me retro but it simply isn’t okay. It really ain’t.

Just this week, a scandal broke via yet another leaked communication that even on the most charitable interpretation, showed scientists colluding to orchestrate the banning of an insecticide which was supposed to be harmful to bees, even though they hadn’t done any conclusive research on the chemical in question. They just knew.

Those people weren’t doing any sort of science I’d recognise. I don’t know these people, I’ve no understanding of them, they’re strangers in our house. They were just planning the simultaneous publication of mutually supportive papers, all of which would come to a predetermined conclusion, before passing the ball on to various green campaigning organisations to raise the issue up the political ladder and get a ban into force. They of course got their ban and we’re now in the second year of it.

The pesticide in question was what’s termed a targeted one; it only killed off specific insects who were harmful to certain crops. Having been denied a sniper insecticide, farmers were obliged to fall back on the more indiscriminate napalm types of killemallchemos which zapped the ass of everything that hops, skips or chirps, but yields of crops like rapeseed have still plunged by 30% because of insect predation that should never have happened. Less of it means more of a price, so Joe the Schmo consumer ends up footing the bill as usual and we’ve yet again ended up flame throwing our way through the lilies of the field courtesy of the environmental movement. You absolutely couldn’t make shite like this up.

The hosanna bit is that bee populations have miraculously recovered within the EU where the chemical was banned, but they’ve also recovered outside the EU as well. You don’t have to be an Einstein to figure out there’s a bijou problemette on the cause and effect front. Of course, having a “cause” is the real problem. They’d happily come up with reason after reason to get all insecticides banned because they just know it’s all wrong. Sorting out the starvation because of the resultant undoubling or untripling of crop yields we’ve had over the last few decades would of course be a problem for the global capitalists, swine that they are.

If what they did was a crime, well, it’s a victimless one, innit?

On any sensible reading of the leaked notes by anyone over the age of nine and three-quarters, it’s obvious what’s being done but upon the story breaking, all of the culprits implicated just denied any wrongdoing and are no doubt beavering away on their next “science” project. Was there some sort of outcry from the science establishment? A condemnation from on high by some heavyweight of science? A peep? From anyone?

The silence was mega decibel high.


My arse – it wasn’t silence, it was indifference, just plain and simple. Nobody gave a rat’s. Once you accept dishonesty and expect a lack of any integrity as the norm, you’re in deep trouble, we all are. Someone, somewhere will have to draw a line and hold it, or we’ll all soon be swirling around the event horizon plug hole.

So now you know, it’s alright to lie, to cheat, to deceive and frankly bugger over the trust that the average person innocently has in science and by implication scientists. It’s now washing powder science, toothpaste science. Just stick some jobbing actor in a white coat, bad haircut, shove some geeky spectacles on him, a pen and clipboard in either hand and tell him to go full on nerd. “I assure you, it’s been scientifically proven. Buy our product.”

Science has no particular obligation as a profession to have more integrity or impartiality than any other one but of course that’s what is innocently expected of it by the ordinary person. That’s why the advertising industry is quite confident utilising that implicit trust to flog whatever product they’ve been hired to promote.

That’s not the science I love, the ephemeral slip of a girl who could deliver to you personally an unassailable fragment of truth in Werner Heisenberg’s terrible universe of uncertainty, where there’s nothing between you and superstition but Laughing Sam and God playing dice. We’re going through a bad phase where science and scientists are just viewed as tarts anyone can put out to work on the street to do a bit of whoring to promote whatever cause you need jacked up the political ladder. The truly stomach churning thing is that scientists themselves feel totally justified in doing that in pursuit of some “cause” or another.

The sin is no longer that a scientist was wrong, because that was always a forgivable mistake and a risk you took, but that they now lie through their teeth to us while at the same time giving us the good old steady eye contact of truth. It’s deliberate, premeditated and totally without any guilt for ruthlessly exploiting the implicit trust in them. We will be punished for that.

All it needs is one person of conscience. When you love something and see it being degraded, being abused for tawdry ends, you have to do something about it in the end because if you don’t, it’s as if your whole career has been wasted. She’s the floor beneath you, the wallpaper that swirls around you, a ceiling full of diamond bright stars and the love of your life, which you’re somehow expected to dump just like that. In the back of your heart where it really counts, you’re still too much in thrall to that pretty young maiden to ever allow any such harm to befall her.

Now you know why climate science leaks like a sieve.

Science, like rationality, is a rope you string between two steady huts of sanity in the middle of a ferocious white-out blizzard of superstition and uncertainty. We have to feel our way along it blindly like the silly fools we are because there’s nothing else. There really isn’t. If we ever let go of it, we’ll all be lost forever.

We’re now in mortal danger of taking our hand off the rope and not caring about it.


Related articles by Pointman:

I’m not a scientist but …

The Age of Unenlightenment.

Click for a list of other articles.


40 Responses to “Is it now considered okay for science to be corrupt?”
  1. johnrmcd says:

    Clear and concise; as usual, Pointman. The world is replete with liars …

  2. I hadn’t seen this – could you publish relevant links?

  3. Justin Passin says:


    on the head as always

    as I have said many times before, Academia is the next National Union of Mineworkers and it will need a bloke with cojones as large as those of Margaret Thatcher to clean out the Augean stables of Academe.

    Seasons greetings and may the force be with you.

  4. John Boles says:

    Slightly OT but relevant,
    man o man I need to write an article about this, the psychology behind it, from (supposedly) a bunch of skeptics!
    John in Michigan

  5. An excellent essay and a most important subject:

    Popular culture can disappear in a blizzard of advertiser-sponsored tweets, but life will go on.

    Politicians can grow increasingly venal and shallow but eventually they pay, one way or another, for their misdemeanors.

    However, if the veracity of science gets flushed away by a deluge of activist-scientists then we are all lost.

  6. Old Woman of the North says:

    Thanks. This is truly scary for the future. Please keep up the good work.

  7. Truthseeker says:

    “we’ll all soon be swirling around the event horizon plug hole.”

    Apparently that is not so bad. You get to go to anywhere in your past and get to change stuff. I know it is true, because Hollywood told me so in “Interstellar” …

  8. Blackswan says:


    As confronting as it is to discover that “ephemeral young maiden” is only a harlot after all, it’s equally shocking to discover that every institution we ever held dear as beacons of truth and justice are all riddled with rot and corruption. Science is only one among many.

    Science, politics, finance, academia, corporations, law & order – they all exist in a symbiotic relationship. And where do such institutions derive their money and power? From we, the people.

    We haven’t just been asleep at the wheel, we’ve been bloody comatose. We trusted these highly educated apparatchiks to be the best of us, to be our leaders, to administer our economic affairs in the interests of the greater good, and what has that trust brought us? They are nothing more than bloated parasites.

    You’re so right Pointman – “Someone, somewhere will have to draw a line and hold it …”

    It’s time we drew that line in the sand – “This far and no further!”

    • Old Rooster says:

      Dear Cygnus atratus, as always you provide an apposite wide shot of the issue Pointman has detailed. I’d just like to add to your list of our failed or failing social and cultural institutions the churches. In some respects the problem can be sheeted home to the loss of a moral compass that is generally agreed upon and actually informs the policy and practice of our various institutions.

      GK Chesterton wrote—
      It’s the first effect of not believing in God that you lose your common sense. [“The Oracle of the Dog” (1923)]

      You hard-shelled materialists were all balanced on the very edge of belief — of belief in almost anything. [“The Miracle of Moon Crescent” (1924)]

      This has become popularly paraphrased in various forms but I’ll run with this one—

      When a man stops believing in God he doesn’t then believe in nothing, he believes anything.

      Robert Graves wrote—”Though the West is still nominally Christian, we have come to be governed, in practice, by the unholy triumdivate of Pluto god of wealth, Apollo god of science, and Mercury god of thieves. To make matters worse, dissension and jealousy rage openly between these three, with Mercury and Pluto black- guarding each other, while Apollo wields the atomic bomb as if it were a thunderbolt; for since the Age of Reason was heralded by his eighteenth- century philosophers, he has seated himself on the vacant throne of Zeus (temporarily indisposed) as Triumdival Regent.” Now we have to contend with the fact that Apollo is a false god or at least his priesthood is now dominated by liars and phoneys.

      • Blackswan says:

        Ah say Ole Rooster, ole buddy, ole pal ….. you’re right (as always), though I suspect that along with retribution for sins such as the Church promised (which kept our more base instincts in check), it was equally the mores of Society that threatened shame and disgrace for ne’er-do-wells. That was when a man’s reputation was based on his word being his bond, on honour, duty and integrity – not his bank balance, his celebrity and what he could get away with.

        It wasn’t ‘them’ who settled for less – it was ‘us’.

        “Do the right thing” has become nothing more than an advertising slogan to ‘encourage’ us to drop our litter in a bin.

      • Old Rooster says:

        Probably not always right but like the stopped clock correct twice a day. 😉😊❗️Oh no! I think I just blew my daily allowance. Maybe if I switch time zones I can fudge it.

      • Graeme No.3 says:

        As Prof. Turney looks the likely winner o the PoY (go Turkey, go) are you suggesting he belongs in a bin or that he will become a has bin?

      • Blackswan says:

        Not a “has bin” G3 – more like a “never was”.

        His very ‘nothingness’ elevates him to uber prat status.

    • Streetcred says:

      “They all exist in a symbiotic relationship.”

      A dynamic tension wherein if one should loose the grip the rest will follow … just look around in business today, full of bullshitters, bullshitting one another constantly, all understanding that they’re all bullshitters talking a load of bullshit, all knowing that the first one to crack will bring them all undone … this is why maintaining the mono-culture is so important … cannot cope with diversity.

      • Blackswan says:

        Exactly Streetcred – and they ALL derive their wealth and power from ‘we, the people’ – simply because we agree that they should have it.

        We are their lifeblood, either as constituents who vote for them or as taxpayers to fill their Treasuries, as consumers who choose to buy their products and invest in their listed companies, or deposit our savings in their banks or agree to pay them interest on our credit.

        THEY need US to exist, and still they regard us with contempt.

        It was US who allowed them to dictate our values, what is acceptable and what isn’t.

        It was certainly WE who settled for less, in allowing them and their values (or lack of them) to change our society so radically in a few generations. WE are responsible for who we are and what we stand for. Our apathy and indifference has not been without cost.

  9. Richo says:

    I wouldn’t call them corrupt, I would accuse them of a greater crime of being lazy and incompetent. A competent and corrupt person would at least go through the motions of doing the research and writing a half credible paper.

  10. Ian W says:

    Many ‘scientists’ have sold their ethics for the next grant. Others, even cheaper, let their ethics wither by not drawing attention to those selling theirs. Even the way research grants are written, begging the question, shows only those with ethics for sale need apply. We are entering a new dark age and the people paid by the power hungry to lead the way are the scientists.


    This story in the same vein as yours went unnoticed by the headline writers at the ABC; quietly slipping past the alarmocrats in the MSM. Seems it might raise some doubts in the general population about other areas of peer reviewed “science” like carbon pollution?!?

    At least it did get published on the ABC web site much to my surprise.

    The other consolation is that the legal system is starting to catch up with some of these law beakers.

    • Ooops … make that LAW BREAKERS.

    • Blackswan says:

      Thanks for the link – great news.

      Now – will the Australian Research Council start demanding some tangible research data justifying the hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars they have dished out to every opportunistic academic and corporate carpetbagger that demanded ‘grants’ for their Climate Fraud escapades?

      Perhaps Professor Buster Gutt might be piddling in his lycra cycling shorts if he had to explain what happened to the $394,000 paid to him to administer a Carbon Credit Card Scam that never eventuated. Perhaps the Crime and Corruption Commission would be interested in that little saga.

      Or the $27 million so far given to a Sydney company conducting tidal/wave energy ‘experiments’ in northern Tasmania and Port Fairy Victoria – all sunk without trace and lying on the seabed of Bass Strait perhaps.

      Let us hope that this CCC fraud prosecution is a trickle in the dam wall and not a token sacrificial lamb that will leave all the other fraudsters unscathed.

      • Graeme No.3 says:

        That must be a different company that spent its grants on littering Botany Bay and the SE coast of South Australia before going bankrupt.

      • Blackswan says:

        That’s really odd isn’t it G3? All these companies in receipt of millions in taxpayer largesse before they all turn up their toes and go into ‘voluntary administration’.

        Even more odd is the fact that the same corporate principals and directors’ names turn up in phoenix companies – same names, same staff, same business locations half the time – just nobody accountable for the debts or expenditure of the recipients of millions in taxpayer ‘grants’.

        Everything is just ‘written off’ but you can bet the new business entities will have their grant applications in the mail by first post on the first day of ‘clean-as-a-whistle’ trading.

        They get away with it because they can.

      • Pointman says:

        Millions sunk into these feel-good projects with great fanfare, then complete silence, no monitoring at all and finally the bankruptcy.


      • Blackswan says:

        Thanks Pointy for the link to your 2012 article – plenty of amazing links to stories that illustrate the extent of Climate Fraud and the Carpetbaggers who’ve reaped billions of dollars in their scams.

        Good too to see our buddy NoIdea’s words of wisdom again. Still miss him.

      • Pointman says:

        I miss him too. One for the boy.


      • Blackswan says:

        A boy at heart – and a man of uncommon generosity, kindness and humour.

        Remembering a brother …. Vale Horace.

      • Old Rooster says:

        You’ve overlooked that new cash cow the Clean Energy Finance Corporation which already has bestowed circa $250M on various follies. Currently they have around $1,250M to throw away. Eventually it was planned to let them have $10,000M to fritter away. Despite Coalition policy to abolish them, the CEFC have proven to be as difficult to eradicate as rabbits, foxes, and cane toads. If the ALP resumes the Treasury Benches before too long then the CEFC could be the biggest gravy train of all.

    • Old Rooster says:

      Disregard the thumbs down. Those icons are too closely spaced for my butter fingers. Anyway they can be better separated Pointy? I think that’s my second. Do I get struck off if I have a third?

  12. durango12 says:

    As we all know, science is just another “story.” There is no such thing as objective truth, so what we want truth to be is as good as it gets. Welcome to the post modern world and the dismantling of the 200-year-long effort to build a science process with integrity.

    • Old Rooster says:

      How do they say…It takes a thief? Or is it a case of letting the fox take charge of the henhouse? Which as a rooster I must take issue with!

Check out what others are saying...
  1. […] har ett bra ”timat” inlägg om detta, som är mycket rekommenderad läsning för Romson …! Hon bör även läsa: […]

  2. […] Is it now considered okay for science to be corrupt? […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: