John Galt Speaking

The Corruption of Science: A Prediction Comes True

“When the search for truth is confused with political advocacy, the pursuit of knowledge is reduced to the quest for power”
Alston Chase

This Earth Day protester doesn’t seem the least concerned about science.

I began writing this article on April 22, 2017. What’s so special about this date? In addition to being the 146th anniversary of Vladimir Lenin’s birth….it’s also the 46th annual observance of Earth Day (I guess anti-capitalist have two reasons to celebrate today)! According to the website….this year’s campaign is all about environmental & climate literacy. Stand up! Join up! Take action!

In this context, I guess the term literacy mean more than just how to spell “global warming.” It must refer to a clear understanding of today’s environmental and climate issues. If this is the case…Earth Day has basically been an exercise in “illiteracy” since its inception! To prove this point…let’s look back at some of the false predictions from the first Earth Day in 1970 and the media hype surrounding it (“Taken from May 1, 2000 Earth Day: Then and Now)

“Civilization will end within 15 or 30 years unless immediate action is taken against problems facing mankind.” — Harvard biologist George Wald

“Population will inevitably and completely outstrip whatever small increases in food supplies we make. The death rate will increase until at least 100-200 million people per year will be starving to death during the next ten years.” — Stanford University biologist Paul Ehrlich

“It is already too late to avoid mass starvation,” — Denis Hayes, Chief organizer for Earth Day

“In a decade, urban dwellers will have to wear gas masks to survive air pollution… by 1985 air pollution will have reduced the amount of sunlight reaching earth by one half.” — Life magazine

“At the present rate of nitrogen buildup, it’s only a matter of time before light will be filtered out of the atmosphere and none of our land will be usable.” — Ecologist Kenneth Watt

“By the year 2000, if present trends continue, we will be using up crude oil at such a rate… that there won’t be any more crude oil. You’ll drive up to the pump and say, ‘Fill ‘er up, buddy,’ and he’ll say, ‘I am very sorry, there isn’t any.'” — Ecologist Kenneth Watt

“[One] theory assumes that the earth’s cloud cover will continue to thicken as more dust, fumes, and water vapor are belched into the atmosphere by industrial smokestacks and jet planes. Screened from the sun’s heat, the planet will cool, the water vapor will fall and freeze, and a new Ice Age will be born.” — Newsweek magazine

As absurd as these false predictions appear now…there was legitimate concern regarding air and water pollution in the 1970’s. I’m sure many if not most of the people who showed up for the first Earth Day had genuine concern for the environment and their efforts did play a role in establishing regulations that helped clean the air and water in the late 70’s and 80’s. But as the environmental movement grew in the 90’s and 2000’s….Earth Day became more about political advocacy, power and money.

Speaking of money…no discussion of false climate change predictions would be complete without an examination of Al Gore’s documentary “An Inconvenient Truth”. Released in January 2006, Al Gore’s “An Inconvenient Truth” cost $1 Million to produce and raked in $50 Million at the box office. Here is a list of the false predictions in Al Gore’s famed fable:

Rising sea levels (wrong). Increased tornadoes (wrong). New ice age in Europe (wrong). Melting Arctic ice – (wrong – it’s expanding). Polar Bear extinction (wrong – they’re increasing). Temperature increase due to raising CO2 levels (wrong – no significant raising in over 18 years). An increase in hurricane strength AKA Katrina (wrong – no F3 hurricanes in past 10 years). Earth will be in a true planetary emergency within 10 years (Wrong – never happened!).

And what did Al Gore receive for this collection of falsehoods? In addition to the $50 million in box office receipts, he won an Academy Award and a Noble Peace Prize!

Al Gore left the White House with $2 Million in assets and is now valued at over $100 million. He makes over $175,000 for speaking fees and sits on a number of executive boards. He has two large residences in Nashville and California and commutes between the two on private jets. He’s on his way to becoming what one congressional leader called “a carbon billionaire”. And if you need more false predictions…the sequel to “An Inconvenient Truth” debuted at the Sundance Film Festival in January. “An Inconvenient Sequel: Truth to Power” will be released by Paramount in July, 2017.

In coordination with Earth Day….organizers also arranged marches in major cities across the globe. The “March for Science” called for scientist and researchers to come out and march with Earth Day protesters to combat budget cuts in the areas of Health & Human Services, the EPA and NIH. Having felt quite cozy during the Obama years (Obama ranked climate change as the top threat to the security of the United States despite more immediate threats from terrorism, Iran and North Korea), the scientific community feels under siege from Trump policies and campaign rhetoric. Never mind the American public has listed climate change at the bottom of their concerns in poll after poll. Perhaps they remember those false predictions from the very first Earth Day in 1970?

The one prediction which few people remember but has actually come true dates way back to 1960. In his farewell address to the American public, President Dwight D. Eisenhower warned the American public of scientific research falling into the hands of the scientific-technological elite. The speech, widely remembered for warning America of the military-industrial complex, also included this warning:

“The prospect of domination of the nation’s scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present and is gravely to be regarded. … we must … be alert to the … danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific technological elite.”

A prime example of how public policy can stifle scientific discussion occurred in the 1970s when Congressional hearings were held on the nutritional diet of the American public. The nation had experienced a sharp uptick of deaths related to heart disease since 1950 and Senator George McGovern headed up a committee to find a culprit. McGovern turned to ONE research study conducted by a charismatic Minnesota Physiologist named Ansel Keys. Keys had studied the diets of 13,000 middle age men in Japan, Europe and the United States (Seven Country Study) and concluded that a diet high in saturated fats caused heart disease. His study persuaded the American Heart Association to issue the country’s first-ever guidelines targeting saturated fat—and he wasn’t shy about shouting down any researcher who questioned his data.

There was plenty of push back on Ansel Key’s study from other researchers and scientist and most certainly food companies. However, the political desire to find a culprit to the growing deaths from heart disease won out in the long run. Those researchers who continued to question Keys research found their government grant money dry up. Time Magazine ran a front page picture of Dr. Ansel Keys and endorsed his finding to the American Public. Other critics, like Dr. Robert Atkins of the famed Adkins Diet, faced ongoing professional and public ridicule. As a result, food companies and opposing researcher gave up the fight and Dr. Keys’ research became medical dogma for over 40 years.

Until March 2014 when Oxford University released the results of their extensive research which examined the results of 72 different studies on saturated fats and heart disease, heart attacks and angina. They found NO link between saturated fat and heart disease. Furthermore, Ansel Keys study was found to be flawed. Keys omitted countries where people eat a lot of fat but have little heart disease, such as Holland and Norway. He also omitted countries where fat consumption is low but the rate of heart disease is high, such as Chile. A practice called “Cherry Picking”. As a result, Time Magazine ran a new cover edition telling Americans they could eat more butter and admitting they were wrong about saturated fats.

The toll on the country was far greater than the humiliation of Time Magazine however. What resulted over the 40 years following the McGovern Report was a sharp rise in obesity and an epidemic in diabetes. Furthermore…..heart disease still remains a leading cause of death in the United States. If you believe the state of government research has improved since the release of the McGovern Report…you’d be mistaken. The Center for Accountability in Science states that nearly every aspect of the federal grant making process is full of political maneuvering and potential bias. They also state much of the research released by governmental research organizations goes through little peer review and the media who reports on it are overly trusting of the findings.

So the next time you hear a politician tell you that climate change science is “settled” remember the multitude of false predictions from the so-called scientific experts. Remember the “Climate-gate” scandal that had climate researchers scrambling to cover up their own words. Remember the costs that Americans are still paying for the fraudulent science of Ansel Keys. Remember the false prophesies of Al Gore and the millions of dollars he’s banked at your expense. But what ever you do….don’t forget who is ultimately responsible for the corruption of scientific research……the scientific technological elite better known as your elected representatives and the corrupt bureaucracy of the Federal government.

This is John Galt Speaking!

Indivisible? More like……indefensible!

“The spirit of resistance to government is so valuable on certain occasions that I wish it to always be kept alive”
Thomas Jefferson

Members from Indivisible OC-48 marched down Main Street to the office of Congressman Dana Rohrabacher in Huntington Beach on Tuesday, February 14, 2017 to deliver Valentine cards to his office asking if he would hold a Town Hall meeting. (Photo by Leonard Ortiz, Orange County Register/SCNG)

It seems that the founders of “Indivisible”, the newly formed protest movement of the far left, does not see a difference between resistance and outright disturbance. For those unaware of the new movement, Indivisible was reportedly formed over two months ago by a collection of former congressional staffers who published a 26 page guide on Goggle’s document servers. The guides purpose was to layout specific tactics to resist the agenda of the newly elected President Donald Trump.

Prominent liberal figures such as Robert Riech and George Takei tweeted about it and soon the document went viral, reportedly crashing the google servers. Thus far the guide has been downloaded over a million times and their new website ( has already had over 10 million page views. So far, over 6000 local groups have registered with Indivisible, agreeing “to resist Trump’s agenda, focus on local, defensive congressional advocacy and embrace progressive values.”

The mainstream media has enjoyed comparing the rise of Indivisible with the Tea Party Movement but the comparison is far off the mark. The Tea Party Movement was truly a grass roots movement formed during the last days of President George Bush in response to the government bail out of our financial institutions. They targeted both establishment republicans as well as democrats in their effort to limit government interference with the free market. While both groups heavily utilized social media to spread its word, The Tea Party focused their efforts on taking back the congress and placing representatives there who held traditional conservative beliefs. This is a far cry from Indivisible sole focus….to disrupt the Trump agenda (even before they knew what the exact Trump agenda was)!

Indivisible claim that their movement is ‘grassroots’ is laughable and was recently shot down by an article on Breitbart’s investigation found numerous ties between Indivisible leaders and left wing billionaire donor George Soros. Indivisible co-founder Angel Padilla currently serves as an analyst for the National Immigration Law Center and previously served with the radical National Council of La Raza. Both of these organization are funded in part by George Soro’s Open Society Foundation. Indivisible has also established ties with several other Soro’s supported organizations such as, the ACLU, and the Urban Justice Center. Indivisible denies these claims but refuses to release a list of it’s donors.

If you’re interested in exactly what style of disruption you can expect out of Indivisible…just ask Republican Representative Dana Rohrabacher of Orange County CA. As one of the few Republicans in Southern California, Rohrabacher’s office in Huntington Beach has been targeted by the local Indivisible chapter for the last few weeks. They want Rohrabacheer to hold a Town Hall Meeting to discuss immigration, Healthcare and Russia. On Valentines Day, IndivisibleOC organized a march from the 7-11 down the street to Rohrabacher’s office. An estimated 100 protester were in attendance carrying their cardboard signs and chanting (supposedly…they were to deliver Valentine’s Day Cards to Rohrabacher). When they got to his building, they were greeted by two policeman who only allowed small groups of 10-15 people in the building at a time so as not to disturb other residents.

Members from Indivisible OC-48 use an intercom outside to the office of Congressman Dana Rohrabacher in Huntington Beach on Tuesday, February 14, 2017. The group delivered Valentines cards to his office asking if he would hold a Town Hall meeting. (Photo by Leonard Ortiz, Orange County Register/SCNG)

When the activist got to the office…they found Rohrabacher’s door locked. They began to slide their cards under the door and at one point, Kathleen Staunton, a 71 year old district director who worked in the office tried to open the door. In doing so, she accidentally struck a 2-year old girl in the head who was sliding a card under the door at the time. When she went to close the door again at least one of the activists then began tugging at the door while Staunton tried to close it. A male activist then grabbed the door and forcefully pulled it open. That caused Staunton, who was pulling from the other side, to fall and strike her head. Rohrabacher spokesman Ken Grubbs said Staunton later fell unconscious and was transported to a local hospital by a coworker (Staunton had initially refused a trip to the hospital with paramedics).

Ironically…Rohrabacher wasn’t even in the office at the time….he was still in Washington. He later commented on the incident in a prepared statement:

“Deliberate or not, the incident came as part of a mob action that not only intimidates but coerces,” he wrote. “Though protesters think of themselves as idealists, they engaged in political thuggery, pure and simple.”

I’m afraid we can only expect more incidents from Indivisible like the one played out at Dana Rohrabacher’s office. Whether Indivisible wants to accept it or not….Donald Trump is the duly elected President of the United States and no amount of resistance will change that. Sadly…it seems we only see government resistance today when the party we don’t like is in charge.

Thomas Jefferson was careful to note that government resistance is valuable only on “certain occasions”. He was speaking of government overreach, tyranny and violation of constitutional and human rights. If Thomas Jefferson was alive today….I’m sure he would see ‘Indivisible’ for what it is….a bitter, jealous group of democrats who just cannot accept the fact they lost the election!

This is John Galt Speaking!

Donald Trump Restores “The Forgotten Man”


“Through false nostalgia for the New Deal, you are taking the younger generation hostage. They are the ones who are going to have to pay far greater taxes. They are the future’s forgotten men.”
Amity Shlaes

It was November 9, 2016 at 3:36AM in New York City and Donald Trump was still reeling from his unlikely victory over Hilary Clinton to become the 45th President of the United States of America. He had already delivered his victory speech to hundreds of his elated supporters at his campaign headquarters but still he had one more thing to do. He had to send out one more tweet:

Such a beautiful and important evening. The forgotten man and woman will never be forgotten again. We will all come together as never before

The forgotten man was actually coined over 133 years ago in William Graham Sumner’s 1883 essay “What the Social Classes Owe to Each Other”. In Sumner’s opening paragraph…he defines the forgotten man:

The type and formula of most schemes of philanthropy or humanitarianism is this: A and B put their heads together to decide what C shall be made to do for D. The radical vice of all these schemes, from a sociological point of view, is that C is not allowed a voice in the matter, and his position, character, and interests, as well as the ultimate effects on society through C’s interests, are entirely overlooked. I call C the Forgotten Man.

Some 49 years later, Franklin Delano Roosevelt evoked the forgotten man in a 1932 radio address promoting his New Deal policies. In his version, however, he reassigned Sumner’s original roles making “D” the forgotten man. Roosevelt used the phrase to describe the poor who needed money rather than the overlooked middle class who were forced to provide it via government dictate. Roosevelt said:

“These unhappy times call for the building of plans that rest upon the forgotten, the unorganized but the indispensable units of economic power, for plans like those of 1917 that build from the bottom up and not from the top down, that put their faith once more in the forgotten man at the bottom of the economic pyramid.”

Jump ahead to the year 2007, Amity Shlaes, a columnist for Bloomberg and a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations publishes “The Forgotten Man: A New History of the Great Depression”. Shales explores the policies of The New Deal through more modern economic eyes. She concludes that while some of the New Deal policies provided relief…many more policies simply prolonged the depression. Stringent regulations and government intrusion into the free market brought business spending and growth to a crawl with unemployment remaining around 10% until the start of World War 2. Shlaes proves how both Hoover and Roosevelt “overestimated the value of government planning” and prolonged the very problems they were seeking to fix.

I read The Forgotten Man several years ago and my biggest take away was that business and industry can simply wait out presidential administrations that are hostile to business. And that’s exactly what has happened after nearly eight years under Obama’s own nostalgic New Deal policies. Obamacare, Dodd Frank, the EPA attack on coal and energy and a plethora of intrusive executive orders have once again stifled business spending and kept GDP under 2% through the duration of Obama’s term. Unlike the Great Depression however, corporate America’s balance sheets were relatively strong with plenty of cash on the books. Rather than deploy that cash to expand their business, they opted to improve efficiency, reduce debt, buy back their own stock, increase their dividend or acquire the competition. They knew that Obama’s bullying would eventually come to an end so they just waited him out.

Enter Donald J. Trump. After a year and half of intense campaigning, he was still three or four points behind Hilary Clinton in most polls entering election day. The media attacks on Trump were relentless throughout the entire campaign. The New York Times, Washington Post and the rest of the main street media did their best to paint his character as unfit for the presidency. The polls, however, stood in sharp contrast to the raucous enthusiasm displayed in Trump’s huge campaign events held throughout the country. Everywhere he went he was greeted by capacity crowds and fire official often had to turn people away. So why this disparity between the polls and the Trump rallies?

The answer became evident as the election results started to flow in on November 8th. As swing state after swing state were added to Trumps electoral college totals…it was obvious that a particular voter segment was turning out in large numbers. It was the forgotten man. The overlooked middle class who was struggling to pay their health insurance, who hadn’t had a pay raise in many years or who were stuck in a lesser job because nothing else was available. The forgotten man turned “shy” because the media portrayal of Trump made them uncomfortable to speak out. The forgotten man, the man who pays, the man who prays, the man who is not thought of….actually turned out and rebuked the failed New Deal policies of Barrack Obama….and his legacy along with it.

So…not only did Donald Trump engineer one of the greatest Presidential upsets in modern history, he restored the forgotten man to his rightful place in Sumner’s social essay. As Sumner wrote: “He will be found to be worthy, industrious, independent, and self-supporting. He is not, technically, “poor” or “weak”; he minds his own business, and makes no complaint”. Unfortunately, I don’t share Trump’s assertion that he will never be forgotten again. History does have a way of repeating itself. But rest assured, if the left ever does forget, the forgotten man is lurking just under the surface, ready to pounce, ready to make a difference again.

This is John Galt Speaking!


Scroll To Top