Yearly Archives: 2014

The Insidious Creation of Doubt

We all know smoking causes cancer and other medical problems. The science is irrefutable. But that wasn’t always the case.

It’s interesting how the tobacco companies defended themselves. They didn’t try to win arguments. They just created doubt.

Tobacco companies poured tens of millions of dollars into “scientific organizations” to do research regarding lung cancer and other types of tobacco poisoning. But scientists were NOT allowed to study the actual affect of tobacco on the body. Instead, they looked at any OTHER possible causes of tobacco poisoning. They identified about 20 substances that COULD cause lung cancer.

So, when a lifelong smoker developed lung cancer, they could dig around and say, “Yes, smoking may have caused it. HOWEVER, ten years ago this person visited such-and-such a place, where he could have been exposed to such-and-such a chemical, which is also known to cause lung cancer in lab animals. So we can’t be sure that cigarettes are to blame.”

They didn’t need to prove anything. They just created doubt. That worked for several decades, until scientific fact overtook them.

The same tactic is being used by the major carbon producers–oil, coal, and auto companies–in the climate change debate. In fact, one of the key “scientists” in the tobacco debates was a man through whom the tobacco companies funneled $45 million. He’s a professional “denier,” who began arguing that we can’t be SURE global warming is caused by man despite the overwhelming evidence.

Numerous other professional deniers–some of them actual scientists, but almost never actual climatologists–also make their living creating doubt about the nature of global warming.

When you see someone on TV downplaying climate change, Google their name and organization. You’ll inevitably discover that, if the person is indeed a scientist, climate science isn’t his area of specialty and he has never done actual research into climate science. And you’ll find that the organization is funded primarily by the carbon producers. But nobody takes the time to check.

(The book “Climate Coverup” exposes all of these organizations and professional deniers. It’s quite fascinating, and disturbing.)

Numerous phony scientific organizations with environment-friendly names have popped up, with spokespersons who go on conservative media to denounce the claims of climate scientists, especially the claim that global warming is caused by human activity.

They can be quite crafty. Some will go even as far as saying, “Global warming is probably caused by human activity. However, there is at least a very little amount of uncertainty, so let’s not rush into anything.” And so, we do nothing. That’s what the carbon producers want–believe anything you desire, just don’t take any action. It’s all about creating doubt and preventing any action from being taken.

A 2009 study showed that 97% of published climate scientists, persons who actually do climate research, were convinced that global warming is caused by human activity. Nearly every scientific organization worldwide has affirmed the same view. But the PR campaign by the carbon producers has been incredibly successful, at least in the United States, where doubt about global warming has increased substantially. The US is unique in that way.

In the future, the successful efforts of the carbon producing companies will become a text-book case in public relations classes. (In my Masters in Public Relations classes, we studied various cases where PR efforts convinced the general public to embrace nontruths.)

Defense attorneys use doubt. They don’t need to prove that their client is innocent. They just have to create enough “reasonable” doubt that one juror will say, “He probably did it, but I can’t be positive.”

In politics, doubt is a standard tactic. Create doubt about Obama’s citizenship and faith, about Romney’s business experience, about John Kerry’s war record, about George Bush’s intelligence, about Reagan’s age and mental capacity. You don’t need to prove anything. Just create doubt.

I suppose Satan works the same way to turn people away from the truth about Christ. And he has plenty of ammunition.

Satan creates doubt about the validity of Scripture. He raises doubt about the reality of Christianity by pointing out hypocrisy among Christians and churches. He convinces you to doubt your own past experiences with Christ. He raises doubt about what you’ve been taught about the faith. He works in a million ways to convince people, “Christianity isn’t for real.”

But convincing isn’t even necessary. Just tell them, “You’ve never seen Jesus or an angel, never heard God speak, never experienced a miracle that can’t be explained any other way. You can’t know for sure. So why commit your life to something with so much uncertainty?”

Satan doesn’t need to prove that Christianity is false. He just needs to create doubt.

The task for the other side–convincing people that smoking really is harmful, that climate change really is caused by human activity, and that Christianity really is true–is extremely difficult. Doubt, especially when people demand absolute certainty, is a big giant to slay.

Fortunately, truth always wins. The tobacco industry lost the war of public opinion. In 30 years, nobody will doubt the reality of climate change–the evidence will be everywhere. And death, which nobody can escape, will eliminate all doubts about whether or not Jesus is for real.

———

Share Button
3 Comments

Melting Pot America

Interesting: 10% of US heterosexual marriages are between persons of different ethnicities. That’s an increase of 28% since 2000. It’s a positive thing in America to see the melting-pot in action.

Now if only our churches could grab onto the melting pot concept. It’s been said that Sunday morning is the most segregated period of the week. Blended marriages, I guess, is one way to help correct that.

At Anchor this week, in addition to all the Caucasians, we had black, hispanic, and Indian persons in the pews. And a sprinkling of Canadians.

Share Button
Comments Off on Melting Pot America

A Look at 11 Presidents on This President’s Day

L-r: Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnson, and Nixon.

L-r: Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, and Ford.

On this Presidents Day, I wanted to look back at all of the presidents during my lifetime, starting with Dwight Eisenhower. I wanted to say something positive about each of them. My strong belief is that every one of these presidents has served with the right motives–to advance the United States of America. They have all worked hard in the best interests of my country, and I respect them all. I despise how, today, we demonize our presidents. I despise the way so many Americans show open contempt for these public servants, and the way media pundits feed that contempt. It’s disgraceful, and it’s not the way I was raised.

So I wanted to keep it positive.Yes, there is plenty to criticize about each of these men. They are all flawed men. But that is not for today, President’s Day. Today, I want to honor them. So here goes.

Dwight Eisenhower. I was born in the middle of Dwight Eisenhower’s presidency. Bob Gates notes in his book that from the end of the Korean War until Ike’s presidency ended in 1961, not a single American soldier was killed in action. This from the allied commander of the biggest war in history. He was a warrior, but didn’t relish taking military action–he knew the costs. That impresses me. Lately, historians have been taking a new look at Ike’s presidency with great appreciation for what he accomplished and his demeanor as president. I think Ike would have been a fascinating president to observe (had I not been in diapers).

John F. Kennedy. I wasn’t yet politically aware during Kennedy’s presidency, so I wasn’t paying attention to him during his presidency. However, it’s clear that he brought new energy to the country. I’m so impressed by his challenge to land a man on the moon, and return him safely, within 10 years. That was an enormous goal. But he believed in the capabilities of America enough to issue the challenge, and the country rose to it. He also advanced the cause of civil rights, despite plenty of opposition from his own party.

Lyndon Johnson. Johnson knew how to get things done. As Senate Majority Leader, he was recognized as a master at gathering the necessary votes. He knew how to schmooze, how to work the phones, how to twist arms. Bill Clinton, also, is recognized as a master politician in this way. But from what I’ve read about him, Johnson was the true master of the artform. He also passed the Civil Rights Act, and famously said that he had just given Republicans the South for the next generation. He was correct–Democrats switched over to the Republican Party, and they still control the South. But Johnson knew this was the right thing to do, and he was willing to pay the political price. That is so very commendable.

Richard Nixon. Nixon, of course, is a tragic figure in many ways. But I think he was always on track regarding what was best for the country, and he seemed to be able to see around the curve. He dealt skillfully with China and Russia, opening opportunities for later presidents. He took strong action regarding the energy crisis, back when OPEC was becoming dominant; for instance, he instituted the national 65 mph speed limit. Perhaps nobody since has been as strong on the foreign policy front. In his post-presidency, he cranked out a number of books which added thoughtful takes on important issues.

Gerald Ford. Ford was the first presidential candidate I voted for…and that was one of only three times my candidate lost. President Ford had a shortened presidency, and his main job was just holding the country together. But he did that, and such will be his legacy. Pardoning Nixon was not a popular move, but I think it was the right move and enabled healing to come to the country after a shattered presidency and a disastrous war. He was a good man, a moral man, a man of integrity and character, and he was respected by everybody in Washington. He was exactly the right man for that unique time.

L-r: Ford, Carter, Reagan, and Bush.

L-r: Carter, Reagan, Bush, Clinton, and Bush.

Jimmy Carter. I always viewed Carter as having a genuine, thoughtful Christian faith not much different from my own. If I sat down to talk with him about my faith, we would be on the same page. And I felt he represented Christ well while in office, and certainly while out of office. He is often mocked for his “malaise” speech, but I don’t think the criticism is fair. I remember hearing that speech and thinking at the time, as a college student, “He’s exactly right. That’s what is happening in the country.” I deeply respect his post-presidency activities, from Habitat for Humanity, to monitoring elections all over the world, to meeting and negotiating with tyrants. I found Carter to be admirable in so many ways. He was also an example for my life, modeling how a Christian can have a strong sense of social justice–and even be a Democrat at the same time. Largely through Carter, I came to realize that many Democratic Party issues are Christian issues. He gave me much to think upon.

Ronald Reagan. Reagan brought a heightened sense of dignity to the White House, setting the stage for every president since (for instance, always wearing a suit in the Oval Office). His sense of humor was tremendous, and he used it skillfully. He had a sense not so much for what he wanted to accomplish as president, as he did for what he wanted America to be. In many ways during the 1980s, America conformed to the image of Ronald Reagan.

George H. W. Bush. President Bush didn’t seem to harbor ill feelings toward people–about things they said about him, or things they did. He was a genuinely nice guy. I greatly admire the relationship he and Bill Clinton have developed. Bush 2 seems to have inherited a lot of his father’s spirit. I also admire the way he conducted the Gulf War, and how he built an international coalition. He respected the roles of everyone around him and let them do their work. He kept his hands out of his son’s presidency, yet maintained his role as father–and by all appearances, he and Barbara were astoundingly good parents. Above all of these other presidents, George H.W. Bush was a humble man.

Bill Clinton. Clinton is the type of person who, when he enters a room, takes over the room. He has an out-sized personality, the type of person who is energized by meeting lots and lots of people–shaking hands, interacting with people, etc. Coupled with that is a stellar intellect and political skills that are off the charts. Since I’m a communicator, I admire people who can communicate well. Clinton knows how to explain things clearly. All the evidence shows that he’s a superb father. And as a Christian, I rejoice that despite his escapades, he salvaged his marriage. As an ex-president, he has done extraordinary work through the Clinton Initiative. He has redeemed himself in my eyes, and I view him as a national treasure.

George W. Bush. George Bush, like his father, is a good man. I believe he’s a man of integrity and good moral character. Bush governed largely by instinct, as he will admit, and for that you want a person of integrity and character. In his second term, when things weren’t going well in our wars, he implemented the surge against the advice of his political advisors, and it turned out to be the right move. He also marginalized Dick Cheney, his right-hand man, and in his place listened more closely to Condi Rice and Bob Gates. This accounts for some of the positive things that occurred during that second term. Cheney continually urged Bush to pardon Scooter Libby for his involvement in outing CIA operative Valerie Plame, but Bush refused. Good for him. As an ex-president, Bush has been absolutely exemplary–perhaps mostly by not doing anything. He has been very gracious toward his successor, and has steadfastly avoided doing anything to get in his successor’s way.

11-obama160Barack Obama. Obama is a deeply thoughtful person, as is clear from his two books, “Dreams of My Father” and “The Audacity of Hope” (both of which I’ve read). In the latter, he wrestles with numerous policy issues, showing me clearly that he had made himself highly informed on a number of crucial issues. I loved the vision he set forth, and the mindset he showed toward dealing with complex issues. I think it has served him well in dealing with the military (who invariably want more men and equipment), and in dealing with Republican Congressman whose top goal was to deny him re-election, and who have continually thwarted him. I feel he has shown much restraint, though his level of frustration must be out of this world. It must also be frustrating to be opposed by so much of the Christian community, and to be labeled continually as a Muslim, when in fact he has clearly articulated his faith in Christ several times. It angers me, the way Christians have demonized him. And yet, he keeps his cool, showing himself to be wise beyond his years. I also greatly admire his role as a father and husband. He has nothing to be ashamed of there.

Share Button
Comments Off on A Look at 11 Presidents on This President’s Day

Only American Spoken Here, Please

Katty Kay, a British journalist, was on Morning Joe this morning. This is an American show, yet she was not speaking American. She was speaking British. I object to that.

The lead actors on House, Homeland, Hawaii 5-0, and Walking Dead are all British, but on TV they speak American. On “The Americans,” Matthew Rhys, a Brit, plays a Russian who speaks American with neither a British nor Russian accent. Daniel Day Lewis spoke American in the Lincoln and Mohicans movies. The new Spiderman guy is a Brit, but you know he speaks American, as Christian Bale did as Batman. I’m glad to see that Jon Stewart got rid of John Oliver on “The Daily Show” because he refused to learn American.

Why shouldn’t Katty Kay be required to learn American if she’s going to be on American TV talking to Americans? After all, they wouldn’t have someone on Morning Joe speaking Chinese or Spanish or Swahili, because Americans don’t speak those languages. If you’re going to work in America, you need to learn American.

I’m going to write my Congressperson.

Share Button
5 Comments

Ten Days and the End of Western Civilization

When I was a kid, we always had a full three months of summer vacation. But today’s school begins in August and extends into June. Now, thanks to this horrendous weather, kids face attending school deep into the summer, to make up for cancellations.

Would it be so bad to say, “Let’s just write off those days. No need to make them up. It was an act of God. Let kids enjoy the summer.”

Would missing 10 days of school cause this entire generation of children to fall so far behind the Chinese that America’s preeminent status would crumble, and communism would conquer the world? I’m just wondering about the apocalyptic consequences of cutting this particular school year short.

Share Button
Comments Off on Ten Days and the End of Western Civilization

The Pursuit of Knowledge

From the It Could Happen to You, But Probably Not File.

In a camp north of Baghdad, a group of anti-government Sunnis were attending a training class on how to become suicide bombers. The teacher conducted a demonstration, and something went amiss. The explosion killed 22 class members and wounded 15. Suggestion for suicide-bomber wannabes: take the course online.

Share Button
Comments Off on The Pursuit of Knowledge

Dan Coats, Please Release Me

dancoatsA while back I signed up for the e-letter from Sen. Dan Coats, whom I’ve voted for every time he has run for office. But he has turned out to be the same type of do-nothing, oppose-everything Republican Senator as everyone else. He hits all the predictable Republican talking points. A big disappointment to me.

Many times, I have used the “unsubscribe” link to get removed from the e-letter list, but I keep getting it. The latest edition just arrived. There is a “Contact Me” link, but it goes to a dead page. Congressional competence in action.

How much effort should I put into getting my name off his list? Not much. I’ll just keep hitting the DELETE button when the unwanted e-letter shows up. He won’t, after all, be in office forever.

Share Button
Comments Off on Dan Coats, Please Release Me

Sochi

It’s really hysterical reading about how unprepared Sochi is for the Olympics. It sounds like quite a mess.

Here’s something from the New York Times: “To appreciate the hotels in this area, it is probably a good idea to think of them not as hotels but rather as a rare opportunity to experience life in a centrally planned, Soviet-style dystopia.”

 

Share Button
Comments Off on Sochi

Book: “Duty,” by Bob Gates

dutyI just finished a remarkable book: “Duty,” by Bob Gates, the Secretary of Defense 2006-2011. I recommend it highly. It’s the best book I’ve read this year (okay, it’s only the 5th book, but still).

I mostly avoid political memoirs. They tend to be more about burnishing legacies than about history. I’ve never read a presidential memoir, for instance. But I’ve always considered Gates to be a man of integrity, above politics—as he showed in working for every president from Nixon on, with the exception of Clinton.

I felt Gates would tell it straight…and I wasn’t disappointed. He writes very frankly about what he experienced and observed, and frequently criticizes his own actions and decisions. This is not a political book in any way.

For books like this, publishers release excerpts that they feel will do the most to get people talking. That was done with reckless abandon for “Duty.” In particular, they released statements Gates made criticizing President Obama and Joe Biden. But those don’t do the book justice.

Gates makes very clear that he greatly admired both Presidents Bush and Obama. He cites instances where both men ignored the cries of their political advisors and base constituencies, and made the right decisions. He reserved his most critical comments for Congress, for the Pentagon bureaucracy, and for the pols within each administration.

Gates offers wonderfully honest assessments of all the major players he worked with. He had superb relationships with both secretaries of state, Condi Rice and Hillary Clinton, and usually found himself on the same page as them. He personally liked both vice presidents, but disagreed with them a lot (especially Biden). He detested being grilled by grandstanding Congresspersons in public hearings.

But his greatest respect goes to the American troops. I got choked up several times as he wrote about his experiences among the troops. And his words in the final chapter about war—and America’s growing tendency to use military force as a first resort—should be heeded by everybody.

 

Share Button
Comments Off on Book: “Duty,” by Bob Gates

America is Beautiful in Any Language

After seeing the Coke “America the Beautiful” commercial, I commented that some people would be upset by it. Got that one right. All across the internet are people saying things like:

  • Nice to see that coke likes to sing an AMERICAN song in the terrorist’s language. Way to go coke.
  • DO NOT sing my Country’s song of Freedom in a different language.
  • Dear Coke, Your commercial is a slap to the faces of my Italian and Finnish ancestors who came here & learned English.
  • Safe to say I’m never drinking coke again after they sing an american song in another language, buncha pricks.
  • You can’t sing an American song in another language!
  • America the Beautiful was meant to be sung in our accepted language. Drink Pepsi.
  • Our forefathers are rolling over in their graves. America the Beautiful is sung in English.
  • This is the most un-American commercial I have ever seen.
  • Because of this I will never drink Coca Cola again.
  • Terrible ad, Coke. Just terrible. Offensive isn’t a strong enough word.

On the other hand, many people (like me) did like the commercial. Including:

  • The best part of this super bowl is Coke losing a million racist customers.
  • So you think people who don’t speak English aren’t allowed to love America?

I have friends who are immigrants from China and Latin America. Although they know English, it is not their “heart” language and never will be. Their heart language is Chinese or Spanish. Should we native English speakers be offended if they, and other immigrants, sing “America the Beautiful” in their heart language?

Is the Pledge of Allegiance invalid if spoken in Spanish?

Is that Coke commercial really so terrible?

Have Americans become a bunch of weenies, getting offended over just about anything?

Coke apparently anticipated that some people would be upset. They created a number of YouTube videos focusing on a single language, kind of a “making of” the Super Bowl ad, it seems.

Share Button
Comments Off on America is Beautiful in Any Language

Receive Posts by Email

If you subscribe to my Feedburner feed, you'll automatically receive new posts by email. Very convenient.

Categories

Facebook

Monthly Archives