September 27, 2020

The Continued Crime of “Scientific Study” Based on Unproven Theory

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

When will this nonsense ever cease? Is there nothing as worthless as money and time spent on what is casually called “scientific study” when all conclusions are based on unproven theories involving climate change?

Once again I find an article written about another college student writing about how moose are dying due to winter ticks and that the increased presence of winter ticks is due to global warming.

Normal scientific research means presenting a sound theory and then, using already substantiated scientific research, along with one’s own methods and collection of data, prove or disprove such theory. Basing an entire study on unproven nonsense of man-caused climate change presents us with a worthless document and should never be published in newspapers and specifically scientific journals.

Post normal scientific research disregards all of this process in exchange for money, supporting narratives and promoting agendas. And yet, ignorant people accept the written word as godly and swoon over it.

Finally, we can say that most “scientists” are, in their eagerness to avoid answering the tough questions, convinced winter ticks are deadly to moose. This, of course, fits their narrative beautifully and thus are able to sidestep the real issues of predator destruction of moose or the real reasons why the winter tick is so prevalent – such as bloated moose populations or perhaps something yet discovered.

But here’s a great idea and one that doesn’t involve some ignorant, fake “scientist” stepping into an echo chamber and repeating the same unproven nonsense about global warming causing too many winter ticks. How about studying the tick? Presently everyone blindly and incorrectly repeat the lie that global warming is the cause of increased numbers of winter ticks. To fit an agenda, someone decided such a claim worked for the promotion of man-caused climate change and thus the lie has been ignorantly repeated for a very long time now. The longer this crap is allowed to circulate, the more difficult it becomes to replace it with truth.

There are very few scientific studies about the winter tick – and I think I have read them all – more than once. None of these existing studies come close to supporting claims of shorter winters causing ticks to multiply. Instead of spending thousands of more dollars on chasing rainbows, pleasing the environmental mental midgets and their romantic scientific pipe dreams creating false paradigms that prop up man-hating agendas, why not get to the meat of the problem and first understand the winter tick. How can anyone begin to make conclusions about the winter ticks’s effects on moose if they know nothing about it? However, I have my doubts that in today’s world of post-normal, pseudo scientific research, any scientist can unwrap the lie of global warming from around his brain long enough to discover truth, or even the desire to do so.

And here’s a related story that certainly blows a lot of theories about winter ticks out of the water. Last week (this would be somewhere around June 16th) the place where my brother works, a man pulled into the yard with a moose in the back of his truck. The animal was still warm, as I understand events. The moose had been struck by a vehicle and died. The Maine Warden Service gave the dead moose to the man.

The part of this story that just knocked me over was that my brother began describing the jaw-dropping sight of tens of thousands of ticks as they continued to suck blood from the dead animal. The action was described as the hair and hide of the animal appearing alive and moving as slow motion waves.

I suppose that it is possible that in mid-June ticks of every variety could have amassed in the thousands on a moose, but as was described to me, through questioning, the winter tick was described.

The question for me becomes one of whether or not biologists have a clue about the life cycle of the winter tick. With the convenient excuse of global warming firmly in hand, we have repeatedly been told about how that if we want to get rid of the ticks, we need longer and colder winters; that when the ticks fall off the moose (in April) that if there is still plenty of snow and cold, the ticks will die off. Even though that theory appears to be unsubstantiated, why then are there tens of thousands of winter ticks still clinging to at least one moose in mid-June.

At the time of the moose collision, did wardens also observe this event and has it been reported to the state’s moose biologists?

Perhaps this is just some anomaly or then again, perhaps this just supports my call for studies about the tick instead of the moose.

But don’t go look!