If Ted Cruz is so smart, why is he always wrong?

I've been hearing that Ted Cruz's college acquaintances, though most of them didn't like him, found him to be very smart.  But his sneakiness is very transparent.

In the March 16 Space News, article, "Senators, Bolden Clash over 'Core Mission' of NASA," Senator Cruz wonders whether NASA has lost its way lately.

Since the end of the last administration, we have seen a disproportionate increase in the amount of federal funds that have been allocated to the Earth science program, at the expense of, and in comparison to, exploration and space operations, planetary science, heliophysics, and astrophysics.

In my judgment, this does not represent a fair or appropriate allocation of resources.  It is shifting resources away from the core functions of NASA.

Lest anyone think Senator Cruz is gaga over space exploration and cosmology, what is really bothering him is NASA's contribution to climate science.  This point was not lost on NASA's Administrator, Charles Bolden, who got right to the point.

We can't go anywhere if the Kennedy Space Center goes underwater and we don't know it.

Senator Cruz's discomfort with NASA's climate science activities makes it interesting that he also recently said things that would seem to belie that discomfort.

And in particular, satellite data demonstrate for the last 17 years, there's been zero warming.  None whatsoever.

Now, it seems to me that a person so happy with the data satellites are giving him would be happy to spend money for more of the same.  Or perhaps Senator Cruz just says what is convenient at a given moment.

You may recognize the "no warming since 1998" argument.  One trick of the climate change deniers is to pick a short space of time during which temperatures went down and point to that as proof.  The year 1998 was a very hot one, but the years 2005, 2010, and 2014 were hotter.  The rate of increase since 1998 has been lower that that before 1998, but it is still getting warmer.

When temperatures rise and fall, they don't do it in a straight line.  If 1998, for example, was hotter than the years 1999 through 2004, it doesn't mean the long term trend is downward.

A simple illustration of this concept follows.  Here in the Washington DC area, the high temperature for Thursday, March 26, is predicted to be 72.  The high for Saturday, March 28, is predicted to be 39.  Nobody would be silly enough to say that that proves that summer won't come this year.

 

 

 

I remember when expertise was respected

People go to school and spend many years gaining expertise in their various fields.  Seems like they should know more about what they do than the ideologues who are trying to tell them how to do their jobs.

How about we let the scientists do science?  How about we listen to them and learn a thing or two?

How about we let the teachers teach?  How about we listen to what they say about educational methods?

How about we let the doctors practice medicine?  How about we listen when they tell us that, rather than Eastern vs. Western medicine, or "mainstream" vs. "alternative" medicine, there's just medicine and not medicine?

Self-delusion

Remember when North Carolina passed the law dictating how the change in sea level was to be calculated?  Calculating something dishonestly might fool the voters, but it doesn't make sea level rise any slower.

Now we hear that Florida's governor, Rick Scott, has forbidden government officials responsible for studying the effects of climate change to use the words "climate change" and "global warming" in any of their communications.  I guess they have to call it something like "you know what."