Science & The Three "S's"

    by Jim Beers
    Jim Beers Commonsense


    "Science", "scientist", "best science", and "scientific method" are all
    legitimate and valued portions of the human experience. They are a means of
    examining what we have learned to date and then to learn more systematically
    in order to make sound decisions and develop new products. "Science" is
    only a MEANS TO AN END: "science" is not an end unto itself. The
    juxtaposition of "science" from a means to an end, to an end unto itself was
    glaringly demonstrated today in the two Washington newspapers in two
    entirely different matters, each beginning with the letter "S".

    First, the Washington Times reported that "Hill urged to cut abstinence
    funding", "Researchers see 'scientific and ethical problems'". Dr.
    Santelli, "a department chairman" at "the Mailman School of Public Health at
    Columbia University" tells us "We want to see that the best programs are
    used" and "that they are based on the best science". He prattles on that
    "Abstinence until marriage is a fairly rare event, certainly for teenagers
    since they don't get married until they're in their late 20's," "It raises
    the whole issue of 'Is that a reasonable goal? Do the programs make sense?
    Are they well-grounded?"

    "Best science"? "Ethical questions"? "Reasonable goal"? How did we come
    to the point that "scientists" claim authority over moral behavior of the
    young? The notion that a "scientist" and "best science" can even suggest
    that OUR children should not be encouraged to abstain from sex as we so
    desire is preposterous. Based on this sort of thinking, "science" might
    eradicate any teaching that stealing or lying is wrong and should be avoided
    because they believe it is not a "reasonable goal" and raises "ethical
    questions" (based on whose morality?). After all if most teenagers have
    lied or stolen, well "'Scientist-in-charge' forbid" that any others be
    importuned and made to feel bad by being told they should not lie or steal!

    Well, one might ask, what does this have to do with the things Jim Beers
    usually writes about? The answer is quite a bit actually. You see this
    overreaching by Columbia University "scientists" is a somewhat dramatic new
    twist in the "science" worship that has been employed by Federal
    politicians, state and federal bureaucrats, University professors, and
    radical environmental/animal rights organizations for 35 years now. Does
    anyone remember when domestic animals and wild animals and wild plants and
    rural activities were the responsibility of property owners and rural
    communities? Does anyone realize that "scientists" and "best science" have
    become merely stalking horses and surrogates for more centralized-government
    socialist movements; and radical causes like eliminating animal ownership
    and activities like hunting and fishing, forest and range management, and a
    whole gamut of animal uses from cockfighting and trapping and rodeos to
    medical testing and animal husbandry for food? If you remember when
    "science" was a friendly tool and not a means to seize private property; if
    you remember when Universities were places to seek help; if you remember
    when politicians protected Americans from those who would take their
    property and traditions (and children) from them: then you should consider
    how much things are changing as you read on.

    The second article appeared in today's Washington Post under the banner, "7
    Decisions on Species Revised". This eco-friendly, journalistic fuzz-piece
    tells us of "a Bush administration appointee" that "influenced" "several
    rulings on whether to protect imperiled species under the Endangered Species
    Act". Although the supposedly nefarious "appointee" was in charge of the US
    Fish and Wildlife Service we are told "the agency turned a blind eye to her
    actions". The hero of this set piece is "Congressman Rahall (D-W.Va.)
    Chairman of the House Resources Committee" who bemoans "the extent to which
    political ideology had influenced the administrations approach to protecting
    plants and animals". The bottom line is that the "go along to get along"
    Secretary of the Interior has reversed the former decisions of the vilified
    appointee to not list such innocuous species as white-tailed prairie dogs
    and lynx along with 12 species of Hawaiian flies, a California toad, and a
    Colorado jumping mouse: Hallelujah!

    If the federal government can "List" the white-tailed prairie dog and lynx,
    they may as well "List" the cottontail rabbit and the starling. "Science"
    and "scientists" will justify "Listing" ANYTHING. This is because the
    professors specializing in prairie dogs and lynx get PAID to justify
    "Listing" them; and then get PAID ad infinitum to testify in lawsuits about
    them; and then get PAID to design censuses for them; and then get PAID to
    "recommend" habitat's to be "taken" without compensation for them; and then
    get PAID to spell out why "Down listing" them is not recommended; and then
    get PAID to justify "tradeoffs" for development "permits"; and then get PAID
    to explain why they "need" to be part of a larger "Native
    Ecosystem/Wildlands/Corridors/etc." scheme as such schemes are introduced.
    Finally they can depend on being PAID as consultants by the radical groups
    that are pushing all the political and bureaucratic buttons that are
    strangling rural America.

    So a "Bush appointee" didn't roll over for the "scientists" and their
    bureaucrat partners: good for her. She did her job of overseeing the agency
    that thinks it should grow in money, personnel, and power annually no matter
    the cost to others or the nation or our way of life. She was undercut at
    every turn by bureaucrats that knew they only had to wait until politicians
    more favorable to them got elected and reversed her. I'll bet that if I
    could get a quarter for every "secret" call to staff members of the new
    House majority from US Fish and Wildlife Service employees to that effect, I
    could go on a Caribbean cruise.

    Then there is the West Virginia Congressman leading this charge to stamp out
    "political ideology". He has been the subject of a major corruption
    investigation about enriching himself very significantly at taxpayer
    expense. His West Virginia constituency is (in my humble opinion) probably
    one of the least concerned group of voters in the nation about all this
    emotional animal hyperbole. As he leads this political dance macabre, the
    sharks are circling and looking for more people to attack. Worthies such as
    the Forest Guardians and Center for Native Ecosystems are joining with
    others to sue and to go after other persons not sufficiently obedient to
    "best science". Talk about strange bedfellows; they don't get much more
    bizarre than a West Virginia Congressman and Forest Guardians: but truth be
    told the Congressman gets to divert voters attention from his other troubles
    and the national radical groups will be donating and volunteering to keep
    such a staunch supporter in office. It certainly doesn't hurt that not one
    of these "imperiled" species reside within 1,000 miles of West Virginia

    So, why does a milquetoast Secretary of the Interior throw one of President's
    appointees to the wolves? Why is a West Virginia Congressman in bed with
    extremists? Why is an agency able to muster such support from the opposite
    party of the President? The answer my friend is the upcoming Presidential
    election. We are now witnessing the advent of the earliest and longest
    Presidential campaign in history. We can look forward to a long string of
    two things:

    1. Endless scandals publicized by the Democrat Committees in the House and
    Senate that are aimed at Republican transgressions carefully described by
    government employees hoping to be rewarded when the Democrats get elected.

    2. Gargantuan and numberless Wilderness, Roadless, Wildland, Corridor, and
    Sanctuary legislation coupled with "expanding" and "beefing up" of every bit
    of environmental and animal rights legislation currently in place.

    Just as in the early 1970's when there was a political confrontation of the
    first order (Watergate), and a hotly debated foreign expedition (South Viet
    Nam) there is a political need to divert our attention (from Iraq and the
    hatred of a President) with a Circus Maximus just as Roman Emperors did when
    they worried about the rabble (that would be you and me). Our Circus
    Maximus is to be a procession of feel-good but wholly unreasonable and
    ineffectual environmental and animal rights radicalism justified and
    disguise by "scientists" and "best science".

    What then are the "Three 'S's'" referred to in the title of this article?
    The "Three 'S's'" being incorporated under "Science" are Sex, Species, and
    Sheep. SEX is demonstrated by the Columbia "scientist" recommending the end
    of abstinence teaching because it is not "reasonable". SPECIES is this
    entire Endangered Species charade that is deadly serious and killing people
    and livestock and game herds and pets and traditions and hunting and fishing
    and ranching and the very right to own and use private property from real
    estate to timber.

    Finally, there are SHEEP; that is you and I. "Science" is being used on us
    like Hitler used the SS and Stalin used the KGB to intimidate the citizenry
    and take away their very way of life and turn it into the sterile dreams of
    others. When we let "scientists" or politicians or professors or radical
    groups do this to us we are SHEEP. When we say enough is enough and restore
    the freedoms and liberties we were given and that we are letting slip away,
    we are MEN! Putting the "Science" genie back in the bottle is a good place
    to start.

    Jim Beers
    28 November 2007

    - If you found this worthwhile, please share it with others. Thanks.

    - This article and other recent articles by Jim Beers can be found at (Jim Beers Common Sense)

    - Jim Beers is available for consulting or to speak. Contact:

    - Jim Beers is a retired US Fish & Wildlife Service Wildlife Biologist,
    Special Agent, Refuge Manager, Wetlands Biologist, and Congressional Fellow.
    He was stationed in North Dakota, Minnesota, Nebraska, New York City, and
    Washington DC. He also served as a US Navy Line Officer in the western
    Pacific and on Adak, Alaska in the Aleutian Islands. He has worked for the
    Utah Fish & Game, Minneapolis Police Department, and as a Security
    Supervisor in Washington, DC. He testified three times before Congress;
    twice regarding the theft by the US Fish & Wildlife Service of $45 to 60
    Million from State fish and wildlife funds and once in opposition to
    expanding Federal Invasive Species authority. He resides in Centreville,
    Virginia with his wife of many decades.



In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, any copyrighted work in this message is distributed under fair use without profit or payment for non-profit research and educational purposes only. [Ref.]

Back to Current Edition Citizen Review Archive LINKS Search This Site