Tuesday, September 21, 2021

COVID and its "Arbitrary Science"

Print Friendly Version of this pagePrint Get a PDF version of this webpagePDF

Scott Gottlieb, the former commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), told "Face The Nation" Sunday that the COVID six-foot social distancing rule recommended by public health officials for months on end was actually "arbitrary in and of itself," and he noted that "nobody knows where it came from."

The so-called "progressives" have so co-opted "science" to advance an agenda, even the far-left "Atlantic" is suggesting they put on the brakes.

Here's why Americans are losing confidence in "science."

And a look at the solution to the chaos.

Be informed, not misled.

How politics shapes science for the progressive agenda.

Gottlieb told Face The Nation's Margaret Brennan the single reason why most schools remained shut last year was "because the CDC (Center for Disease Control and Prevention) was telling them that they had to keep kids 6 feet apart. If--if CDC had said you can only--you have to keep kids 3 feet apart, then a lot of schools would have been opened."

"The 6 feet was arbitrary in and of itself, nobody knows where it came from," Gottlieb explained. 

"The initial recommendation," he says, "that the CDC brought to the White House ...was 10 feet and a political appointee in the White House said we can't recommend 10 feet."

He continued, "Nobody can measure 10 feet. It's inoperable. Society will shut down. So the compromise was around six feet. Now imagine if that detail had leaked out."

Then he said this:

"The CDC said 10 feet, it should be 10 feet, but 10 feet was no more right than 6 feet and ultimately became 3 feet. But when it became 3 feet, the basis for the CDC's decision to ultimately revise it from 6 to 3 feet was a study that they had conducted the prior fall. So they changed it in the spring. They had done a study in the fall where they showed that if you have two masked individuals, two people wearing masks, the risk of transmission is reduced 70% with masks if you're 3 feet apart. So they said on the basis of that, we can now make a judgement that 3 feet is an appropriate distance. Which begs the question if they had that study result in the fall? Why didn't they change the evidence in the fall? Why did they wait until spring?"

That's how politicized "science" has become. Have we gotten to a point where "science" has become a mere tool to advance a relativistic, evolving political agenda rather than a continuing discovery of truth, even God's truth?

I believe it has.

"Compassion" has become a virtue-signaling word of the religious left to promote open borders and globalism.

"Inclusivity" is really about creating a society of the "oppressed" victims and the privileged  "oppressors."

The LGBTQ rights are really about moral degradation and an expression of rebellion against Nature and Nature's Creator,  Almighty God.

So " science"  becomes another tool to advance an agenda that misleads the public and amasses power for the elite ruling class.

The far-left "Atlantic" is concerned that the activists may be going too far.

Emma Green, writing for the Atlantic, begins: "Progressive communities have been home to some of the fiercest battles over COVID-19 policies, and some liberal policymakers have left scientific evidence behind."

"For this subset," she says, "diligence against COVID-19 remains an expression of political identity---even when that means overestimating the disease's risks."

The story is long and winding. While I don't suggest you waste your time reading it, I mention it to make my point. The Atlantic is far-left and is considered the elite voice of the left. Widely read, it is suggesting the left put on the brakes a little before they begin to look uninformed and maybe worse---a reflection and echo of how they have defined conservatives.

True science isn't arbitrary.

Abeka is one of the widely used curricula in Christian schools and millions of homeschooling homes.

Dr. Phyliss Rand is associated with Abeka. In promoting Abeka's materials, she makes some points that should be considered in the context of our current "arbitrary science" era.

She says:

"Instead of progressivism, we could use the terms 'experimentalism', 'instrumentalism', 'pragmatism'; but progressivism is a good overall word...Because the term progressive sounds so positive and because 'traditional' may sound passe or out of step, perhaps it is worth saying that Abeka does not reject innovation or improvement...American educational traditions are Christian.' 

Then she says this: 

"Progressive education is the development of those who rejected the Christian world view and traditions of their fathers and transferred their faith to science, evolution and psychology. It is secular. It is humanistic. It is more than an attempt to just bring more freedom and activity into the classroom. It is not an exaggeration to say that progressive education, under whatever name it goes by, is the greatest force in what Henry Morris calls 'The war against God'."

She notes that when John Dewey and others first promulgated the new progressive philosophy in the early 1900s, it likely sounded terrible to teachers in the classrooms who still thought children needed to be taught skills and information and trained in righteousness.

But Dewey kept writing, and progressivism worked its way down through the system.

Today we see the flowering of their work. Social issues and fads are the focus in the classroom ---not fundamental education. And Christianity has been removed from the education experience.

Which brings me to science. And the Bible. And Christianity.

Science and Christianity are very compatible.

The left often labels Christians as "not believing in science...or science deniers."

 Actually, the opposite is true. The more you believe in God, and believe that "In the beginning, God created..." the more you believe in true science. True science is the ongoing discovery of what already is---as God created it. And that applies to true medical science.

As real science progresses, it continues to discover God's Truth.

In her book, "Confronting Christianity," Rebecca McLaughlin makes the case that Christianity and science are not only compatible but related.

Albert Einstein kept pictures of three scientific heroes on the wall of his study: Isaac Newton, Michael Faraday, and James Clerk Maxwell.

Newton (1642-1727) is one of the most influential scientists of all time, famous for formulating the laws of gravity and motion. While not an orthodox Christian, Newton was an earnest believer in the God of the Bible and wrote more about theology than physics.

Faraday (1791-1867) is best known for his work on electromagnetism, and his scientific contributions were so significant that he is considered one of the greatest experimental scientists ever. The Faraday constant is named after him, as is the Faraday effect, the Faraday cage, and the Faraday waves. Faraday was a passionate Christian, deeply interested in the relationship between science and personal Christian faith.

Maxwell (1831-1879) has been credited with the second great unification of physics, bringing together electricity, magnetism, and light. He was an evangelical Presbyterian, who became an elder of the Church of Scotland.

For these men, science and faith went hand in hand, and studying God's creation was an act of worship.

There are many, many more acclaimed scientists who were not atheists, but devout Christians.

Lord Kelvin was another. His name is memorialized in the Kelvin unit of temperature.


I'm not a scientist. But you already knew that. You probably aren't one either. But there are two kinds of science. One that's a mere tool in the hand of the progressive, using it as a means to the end of advancing a secular progressive agenda, and the other a pure scientist who follows the evidence as it is discovered.

One identifies the desired end, then begins to formulate their science to support that end, which is often attached to grant money or profitable products---and always to a godless worldview.

The other follows the evidence and formulates their beliefs accordingly.

The next time you hear a progressive talk about "following the science," don't believe them or follow them. They're lost and simply looking for pieces of evidence that support their foregone conclusions, which always include a secular progressive humanist worldview and an agenda that for the most part is created in rebellion toward God.

Paul warned the Roman Christians in his day: "And be not conformed to this world; but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God" (Romans 12:2).

Be Informed. Be Discerning. Be Vigilant. Be Prayerful. Be Transformed.