Errors exist for a reason. Otherwise, they get corrected. So the errors that exist have been resistant to being corrected.

Therefore, the task in correcting errors is not just a technical analysis; it's overcoming the forces of corruption that create the errors for exploitation purposes. The underlying forces of corruption need to be explained to correct the errors.

The reason for producing errors is to monger power, which is a corruption. Incompetents monger power as a method of prevailing. They have to subdue rationality to do that. Rationality is a basic requirement for solving human problems. So power mongers are creating problems under a pretense of solving problems.

The net effect is that there are two elements to mongering power. One, falsehoods are needed to break down the rationality which corrupters cannot produce because of their incompetence. And two, an image of the opposite is needed for pretending that the destructiveness of corruption is something of value. Realities are re-arranged by corrupters for glossing over the destructivity with positive imagery.

The problem in correcting such basic errors as corrupt science produces is that everything needs to be done in the first sentence. The rationalizing is designed to negate criticism, so the criticism is not accepted as long as the rationalizing is in place.

The rationalizing of science has been designed to convince the unwary that the gods have spoken. Science is supposedly self-correcting; so criticism is viewed as outlaw behavior, when dupes have been created and taught the rules required by power mongers for their success.

The first rule of power mongering is that power is truth, knowledge and virtue (the basis of bigotry. Bigotry is the assumption that power is virtue and powerlessness is corruption.) The second rule of power mongering corruption is that consensus is the primary test of truth. (How could all those power mongers be wrong?) The third rule is to never question motives—that is, where there is power—a corollary of power being virtue. But always question motives where there is powerlessness.

There is a rational world where none of that is relevant. Rationality is aligned upon the laws of the universe as objective realities. The persons disappear where there is rationality aligned upon objective reality.

The problem is that power mongers have been taking over the social structures and shoving out rational persons. Social deterioration is the result. A lack of proper standards in journalism is one of the most visible manifestations. Journalists now days are usually promoting a cause rather than informing. Knowing nothing of a subject is not relevant to promoting a cause. So a lot of fraud is being imposed onto the public through fake journalism.

Fake science and technology exist as social concerns for no other reason. Corrupt Journalists imposed those realities upon an unwitting public. Journalists brough corrupt science to the surface and convinced the public, while real scientists got shoved out of the process.

The promoters of fake science and technology use a fake consensus which they manufactured as the only allowed test of truth. No criticism of the errors is allowed in the journalism that created the frauds of greenhouse gases, renewable energy, electric vehicles and self-driving.

Rationality is a methodology with standards. Explanations of basic knowledge are required in science. What rationality is up against is claims and motives without suitable explanations.

The Social Dynamic

Corrupters are drawn to false science due to the bliss of fakery. Bliss becomes truth, knowledge, superiority and infallibility when being promoted as power. Then being aligned with the assumed infallibility of science, corrupters assume anything they imagine about the subject is the true science and anyone who disagrees with them is anti-science even while contradicting what scientists are saying and knowing nothing of the complexities of science.

In that manner, it was nonscientists who solidified the falsehoods of greenhouse gases. Otherwise, the incompetent scientists were losers in science being ignored by real scientists. Only after the nonscientists got involved and brought false science to the surface, could the incompetent scientists follow them in making absurd claims about the effects of greenhouse gases.

Correcting The Obstinance

It can't be stated enough, that looking out the window is not science and weather is not climate. Know-nothings can't figure out how all that heat could exist without carbon dioxide being the cause. What would the cause have been in 1936, when no one heard of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere? That's what the cause is now.

A molecule in the atmosphere is not destroying planet Earth. The cause of heating and droughts is high pressure air masses parking in one place. When that happens, heat accumulates faster than it can dissipate away.

It takes motion of air to cool the planet. When the air stops moving, the air overheats. That's because convection is like a fan. Moving air cools, particularly over the oceans where evaporative cooling should occur.

There is a three thousand mile wide high pressure zone off the west coast of the U.S. which has been increasing every year. It prevents ocean air from cooling the west coast. Something similar has been occurring in several places.

There is also a La Nina ocean current phenomenon in the Pacific Ocean which causes droughts in North America and floods in other places.

One of the problems is that solar intensity has been increasing for several years. It does that every few centuries. That's in addition to oceans constantly warming between ice ages, because solar radiation goes about ten meters into the oceans, while the heat does not easily get back out. Only an ice age cools the oceans back down. The oceans are cooled 5°C by an ice age.

The thing that is so disgusting about global warming is that criminal ignorance, corruption and conspiracy are promoted as superior standards to real science. Ignorance is criminal when it prevails over science. It's called fraud.

What The Public Is Getting Wrong

What the public is getting wrong is looking to impressive figures to determine truth. Falsehood will always be the result, because the persons must disappear before truth can be determined. Truth does not come out of nowhere. Truth is determined by evaluating relationships between realities. Only consistent relationships for all related realities define truth.

When the subject matter is science or technology, only persons who have adequately studied the complexities can determine what the related realities are and evaluate the relationships. Does that leave out the rest of society? Not at all, because rational persons have no difficulty explaining what they know to the general public. But when scientists tried to do that, they were shoved aside and often out of science. In place of rationality applied to the subjects, know-nothings in journalism and organizations produced nonsense and brought incompetent scientists to the surface.

In other words, there is a definitive and highly visible difference between proper and improper. Explanations of related realities define the difference. Doing that was not allowed, while fakes railroaded science and technology.

Persons who are wrong never explain, because explanations prove them wrong. They don't even know they need to explain. Not knowing they need to means they could not be right.

So why does the public listen to such fakes? In part because incompetent scientists produce fake substitutes for explanations, such as modeling shows humans cause global warming. That's not an explanation. Modeling is not science, because it is all guess-work—tweaking the numbers until they show the desired results. Looking out the window produces the same result.

Explaining science means applying the basic principles of science, such as radiation being emitted by carbon dioxide as fast as it is absorbed and no such thing as trapping heat being involved. The public needs to stop listening to fakes who do not produce proper explanations.

Note: Climate change is too fraudulent of a term to repeat. It's like saying elevation change as the purpose of automobiles. Are you for or against elevation change? What type of automobiles should be used for elevation change?

Humans don't change elevation or climate. What is proper elevation or climate? Supposedly, there is an ideal climate, as if there were an ideal elevation. Is sea level the ideal elevation? Wouldn't a few hundred feet above sea level be an improvement? Or would some persons prefer a mile above sea level?

Know-nothings imposing their climate change garbage onto us is like the Mafia trying to impose extortion of the fish market onto us.

What I Do

What I do is on a different planet than usual. It's abstract evaluation of basic realities—close to unheard of on planet Earth.

The general assumption is that I am supposed to be doing what everyone else does. Since I don't, I must be a loser. Being a winner is the assumption that goes with all corruption. Winners produce truth, knowledge and all that is right. It's why conservatives promote values with no regard for specifics. The values supposedly make them winners.

So the nature of abstract evaluation of basic realities needs to be described. Abstract evaluation is complex and time consuming. Not much of that can be done with usual routines, which are quite disruptive. I can only do a lot of that being disconnected from everything else. I haven't owned a television in twelve years.

Anyone who has time for watching things isn't getting much else done. Yet everything in media is reverting to video. The streamers assume people are going to keep signing up for more streaming, while there aren't enough hours in the day to watch more streaming.

Mental pain disconnects me from society. Distractions create the mental pain, so I need isolation to reduce the mental pain. Mental pain is caused by memories of pain which are too close to the surface and contacted by distractions. That process is vastly different from depression, which is mostly independent of distractions.

The mental pain drove me out of graduate school; so I moved onto the vacated farm where my grandparents used to live and did mushroom research. I soon noticed a lot of errors in science and derived information on those subjects.

Mental pain would have always been a factor influencing my life; but I didn't realize it until it became more extreme in graduate school. I was always avoiding other persons and assumed there was something normal about it. I was wondering why everyone else was so gregarious. Why didn't they get separated from each other and enjoy life more, I was assuming.

Disconnecting was easy, since I spent summers doing farm work. My grampa was a farmer who died of a heart attack when I was eleven years old. So my dad, being an auto mechanic, converted the farm into producing winter wheat; and I did much of the farm work.

I think driving a tractor promotes abstract evaluation, as there is not much else to do going up and down fields endlessly. It focusses attention on the biology of soil. I started college in agriculture and then switched majors to microbiology.

All knowledge is abstract; so it takes abstract evaluation to increase knowledge. Abstract means nonperceivable. The way it works is that humans construct representations of complexities which makes the subjects easier to comprehend and describe, which is what knowledge is.

Basic reality is the reality that other realities depend upon. It's like the trunk of a tree, while everything else is branches. It's about impossible to get basic reality wrong—it either exists or it doesn't—because all of the realities that depend upon the basics clarify and show errors.

That means focussing on basic realities clarifies a lot. But corrupters hate the concept, because they need to avoid the truth that exposes their incompetence and corruptness.

So I've been writing basic moral philosophy since 1976 exposing corrupters for the corrupters that they are. Of course, it makes nearly everyone livid. They seem to know what shoe to wear. Condescending and pedantic were the most definitive responses. Condescending means I would need to be more important than they are before telling them anything. Pedantic means they don't have a clue what basic reality is; and I'm not supposed to be telling them.