The US business community is probably more aware of China’s innovative abilities than Fred Reed believes, but the non-business average American probably still thinks, wrongly, that the Chinese don’t innovate. From Fred Reed at lewrockwell.com:
For many years the United States has regarded itself as, and been, the world’s technological leader. One can easily make a long and impressive list of seminal discoveries and inventions coming from America, from the moon landings to the internet. It was an astonishing performance. The US maintains a lead, though usually a shrinking one, in many fields. But:
China has risen explosively, from being clearly a “Third World” country forty years ago to become a very serious and rapidly advancing competitor to America. Anyone who has seen today’s China (I recently spent two weeks there, traveling muchly) will have been astonished by the ubiquitous construction, the quality of planning, the roads and airports and high-speed rail, the sense of confidence and modernity. Compare this with America’s rotting and dangerous cities, swarms of homeless people, deteriorating education, antique rail, deindustrialized midlands, loony government, and the military sucking blood from the economy like some vast leech, and America will seem yesterday’s country. The phrase “national suicide” comes to mind.
A common response to these observations from thunder-thump patriots is the assertion that the Chinese can’t invent anything, just copy and steal. What one actually sees is a combination of rapid and successful adoption of foreign technology (see Shanghai maglev below) and, increasingly, cutting edge science and technology. More attention might be in order. A few examples: A few examples from many that might be adduced:
Doctors are trained to accept and promote the efficacy of vaccinations. From Richard Enos at collectiveevolution.com:
- The Facts:A 6-month old child died a day and a half after receiving her scheduled 6 vaccines, and her mother is outraged that the pathologist cannot find the cause of death but is unwilling to do tests to determine the possible impact of the vaccines.
- Reflect On:Are most doctors put into a corner when a child they have just given vaccines to gets injured or dies? Would they feel free to say they suspect that the vaccines are the cause even if they believed it to be true?
If we take a broad overview of the structure of conventional medicine in our Western societies, we are left with an inescapable conclusion: it is set up as a business, where profit is most highly valued and human health and safety is secondary. The evidence for this is overwhelming and is discussed in greater detail in many of our articles on the subject listed at the end of this article.
This is absolutely not to say that there are not loving, upstanding people who are doctors, researchers, or otherwise as part of the Western medical establishment. Not at all. I believe most of them are. However, when it comes specifically to the family doctors and pediatricians who are trusted by their patients to make recommendations for their patients’ health and well-being, there is a limit to how far they can push the boundaries of the highly controlled business structure they find themselves in.
Life has gotten a lot better for most of the world’s population over the last two centuries, due to the one “ism” that works: capitalism. From Onar Am at libertynation.com:
During the heyday of Windows in the 1990s, Bill Gates was vilified as an evil capitalist. Then he started the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation aimed at helping the poor and making a better world, and slowly his name was transformed on the left into something akin to a decent human being. However, he recently tweeted a highly controversial fact: Extreme poverty is rapidly being eradicated.
His tweet shows an infographic by Our World in Data with the development of key factors, such as education, child mortality, and extreme poverty in the last 200 years. He has the audacity to celebrate when poverty is overcome. Apparently, Gates isn’t just virtue signaling to the cultural elites. He truly seems to care about the poor, and is genuinely happy when poverty is alleviated. Also, he isn’t afraid to give credit where credit is due.
Not everybody is buying into climate change. Count Doug Casey and E.B. Tucker among the more astute of the “deniers.” From Casey and Tucker at caseyresearch.com:
Justin’s note: Today, I continue my conversation with Doug Casey and Strategic Investoreditor E.B. Tucker on the great climate change hoax. If you missed part one, click here to catch up.
Below, the guys take a closer look at what’s really going on… and why all of the hysteria is actually a big threat…
Justin: Why peddle this idea that the Earth is warming rapidly? What’s the motive?
E.B.: Bigger government.
I mean, climate change has become a pop culture drumbeat. If you watch the Oscars, somebody is going to say, “We’ve got to do something about the climate.”
But no one, of course, knows what to do. All they know is that we should give the government more money to do something about this. And that money is obviously going to come from the developed world. I mean you’re not going to get any money if you implement a carbon tax in the Democratic Republic of the Congo.
So it’s basically just a giant tax scheme. I mean carbon taxes brought in $82 billion last year. That’s a big number. And no one even knows where this money goes. You can’t question it because everybody has the best of intentions.
What could go wrong? From Barry Brownstein at fee.org:
Harvard’s Gernot Wagner wants to save the world from global warming. His method? Develop a new type of plane that will fly more than 4,000 missions a year dumping particulates into the stratosphere.
Wagner and his colleague Wake Smith call the proposed plane “SAI Lofter (SAIL).” Anonymous individuals at “Airbus, Atlas Air, Boeing, Bombardier, GE Engines, Gulfstream, Lockheed Martin, NASA, Near Space Corporation, Northrup Grumman, Rolls Royce Engines, Scaled Composites, The Spaceship Company, and Virgin Orbit” provided input.
Estimates for SAIL’s design and operation seem sophisticated but are fabricated. Wagner and Smith admit, “No existing aircraft design—even with extensive modifications—can reasonably fulfill [their] mission.”
Wagner and others believe that scientists can calculate how many particulates will be needed to cool the Earth to a desired temperature.
Wagner and Smith are not alone in their geoengineering dreams. As early as 2006, Paul J. Crutzen, Nobel laureate in chemistry, called for “stratospheric geoengineering research.” Harvard professors David Keith and Frank Keutsch hope to experiment via balloons spraying “a fine mist of materials such as sulfur dioxide, alumina, or calcium carbonate into the stratosphere.” Wagner, Keith, and Keutsch are all part of the Solar Geoengineering Research Program at Harvard.
Don’t confuse climate change advocates with facts. From Jay Lehr and Tom Harris at western journal.com:
City on a hot day. (Tom Wang / Shutterstock)
The idea that climate change is producing heat records across the Earth is among the most egregious manipulations of data in the absurd global warming debate.
Americans receive a daily barrage from the fake news media and climate “experts” reporting that each and every day, week, month or year is the hottest on record due to global warming. On Feb. 7, several major newspapers carried stories of the declaration by NASA and NOAA that the past five years have been the warmest on record.
Sadly, these supposed experts use mathematical equations that do not jibe with reality over the past 140 years.
The same climate experts warn that record heat is just the tip of the iceberg. We are constantly told that global warming is the root cause behind any and all weather events that are extreme, destructive, unusual or uncomfortable.
Many of these fear mongers also say we should stop burning fossil fuels that are causing this mayhem.
Government and the media try, on a variety of subjects, to make their stories true simply by endless repetition. That doesn’t make them true. From Britigne Shaffer at lewrockwell.com:
It’s that season again: Another outbreak of a benign childhood disease that only a couple of generations ago the vast majority of the US population contracted and recovered from, serendipitously occurring precisely at the time when legislators across the country are putting forward bills to strip parents of the right to choose whether or not to vaccinate their own children.
In this climate of interest-driven hysteria, it is important to be able to distinguish between reliable information on the issue, and misinformation. Here is one quick way to tell the difference:
Take a look at these three recent articles on the “crisis” of parents who choose not to vaccinate their children. Do you notice something they all have in common?
“Measles outbreak may spread to California from other states, doctors are warned”
“Measles outbreak fueled by anti-vaccination movement, infections disease expert says”
“Dangerous anti-vaccination myths ‘breeding’ on social media, report warns”
Leaving aside the frenzied headlines, what all three share is something common to the vast majority of mainstream articles about the vaccine controversy. You’d be forgiven for thinking that it is the obligatory recitation of some version of the “Wakefield catechism.” Here is one, from KTVQ:
“The mistaken belief in a connection can be traced back to 1998, when a doctor in the U.K. published a now discredited study claiming the measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) vaccine was linked to autism. His research was found to be based on fraudulent data, the study was retracted, and the doctor lost his medical license.”