opinion web
Liberal Opinion General Opinion
Thomas Sowell
Thomas Sowell
7 Apr 2015
The Iran 'Agreement' Charade

By abandoning virtually all its demands for serious restrictions on Iran's nuclear bomb program, the Obama … Read More.

31 Mar 2015
Etiquette Versus Annihilation

Recent statements from United Nations officials, that Iran is already blocking their existing efforts to keep … Read More.

31 Mar 2015
Who Trashes Liberal Arts?

An op-ed piece titled "Conservatives, Please Stop Trashing the Liberal Arts" appeared last week in the Wall … Read More.

The New Inquisition


How long will this country remain free? Probably only as long as the American people value their freedom enough to defend it. But how many people today can stop looking at their electronic devices long enough to even think about such things?

Meanwhile, attempts to shut down people whose free speech interferes with other people's political agendas go on, with remarkably little notice, much less outrage. The Internal Revenue Service's targeting the tax-exempt status of conservative groups is just one of these attempts to fight political battles by shutting up the opposition, rather than answering them.

Another insidious attempt to silence voices that dissent from current politically correct crusades is targeting scientists who do not agree with the "global warming" scenario.

Congressman Raul Grijalva has been writing universities, demanding financial records showing who is financing the research of dissenting scientists, and demanding their internal communications as well. Mr. Grijalva says that financial disclosure needs to be part of the public's "right to know" who is financing those who express different views.

He is not the only politician pushing the idea that scientists who do not march in lockstep with what is called the "consensus" on man-made global warming could be just hired guns for businesses resisting government regulations. Senator Edward Markey has been sending letters to fossil-fuel companies, asking them to hand over details of their financial ties to critics of the "consensus."

The head of the National Academy of Sciences has chimed in, saying: "Scientists must disclose their sources of financial support to continue to enjoy societal trust and the respect of fellow scientists."

This is too clever by half. It sounds as if this government bureaucrat is trying to help the dissenting scientists enjoy trust and respect — as if these scientists cannot decide for themselves whether they consider such a practice necessary or desirable.

The idea that you can tell whether a scientist — or anybody else — is "objective" by who is financing that scientist's research is nonsense.

There is money available on many sides of many issues, so no matter what the researcher concludes, there will usually be somebody to financially support those conclusions.

Some of us are old enough to remember when this kind of game was played by Southern segregationist politicians trying to hamstring civil rights organizations like the NAACP by pressuring them to reveal who was contributing money to them. Such revelations would of course then subject NAACP supporters to all sorts of retaliations, and dry up contributions.

The public's "right to know" has often been invoked in attempts to intimidate potential supporters of ideas that the inquisitors want to silence. But have you heard of any groundswell of public demand to know who is financing what research?

Science is not about "consensus" but facts. Not only were some physicists not initially convinced by Einstein's theory of relativity, Einstein himself said that it should not be accepted until empirical evidence could test it.

That test came during an eclipse, when light behaved as Einstein said it would, rather than the way it should have behaved if the existing "consensus" was correct.

That is how scientific questions should be settled, not by political intimidation. There is already plenty of political weight on the scales, on the side of those pushing the "global warming" scenario.

The fact that "global warming" models are not doing a very good job of predicting actual temperatures has led to a shift in rhetoric, with "climate change" now being substituted. This is an issue that needs to be contested by scientists using science, not political muscle.

Too many universities are too willing to be stampeded by pressure groups. Have we forgotten Duke University's caving in to a lynch mob mentality during the "gang rape" hoax in 2006? Or the University of Virginia doing the same thing more recently?

Politicians determined to get their own way by whatever means necessary may have no grand design to destroy freedom, but what they are doing can amount to totalitarianism on the installment plan.

Thomas Sowell is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305. His website is To find out more about Thomas Sowell and read features by other Creators Syndicate columnists and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate Web page at



6 Comments | Post Comment
The prime example of governmental inquisition comes, of course, from Florida, where the Republican governor is forbidding State agencies from referring to "global warming" by its name. It's too bad Dr. Sowell's article missed it.
There is a consensus today about global warming. More than one hundred and fifty countries agree according to the UN, and not because all of them are communists (or vegetarians, or whatever they can be tarred with). This consensus is based on scientific review of the research. The only place of dissent is within the Republican party, as it fears antagonizing its paymasters. To await the assent on this matter by polluters such as the Koch brothers or the "researchers" they fund is like awaiting the admission to the risks of smoking by the cigarette companies- many people with die before we see it.
Comment: #1
Posted by: ED MOSS
Tue Apr 14, 2015 11:01 AM
Comment: #2
Posted by: E. Calvin Beisner
Tue Apr 14, 2015 1:52 PM
Ed Moss,

Have you never really asked yourself why the rhetoric did change from 'global warming' to 'climate change?'

Your Friend,
Comment: #3
Posted by: Eric Wixom
Tue Apr 14, 2015 4:53 PM
Re: Eric Wixom
It changed when it became clear that "global warming" had the risk that some might interpret the term to mean that all places would be getting warmer. Climate change better reflects the complexity of the models and the data. New York can have one nasty winter while average global temperatures are rising.
"Politicians determined to get their own way by whatever means necessary may have no grand design to destroy freedom, but what they are doing can amount to totalitarianism on the installment plan."
An excellent description of the Bush administration treatment of science.
Comment: #4
Posted by: Mark
Tue Apr 14, 2015 8:25 PM
"Politicians determined to get their own way by whatever means necessary may have no grand design to destroy freedom, but what they are doing can amount to totalitarianism on the installment plan."
Mr. Sowell,
If this statement truly reflects your view on the preservation of freedom, will you support those patriotic Americans who want to see the USA PATRIOT act repealed, or at least brought tightly under civilian control? We have made far to many totalitarianism installment payments on this Bush-era disaster. It is up for re-authorization this June. NOW is the time to get to work on this. What say you? Do you have the courage to stand up to the war party?
Comment: #5
Posted by: Mark
Wed Apr 15, 2015 6:09 PM
Regarding the recent article "The New Inquisition ", those Dem politicians who are so interested in determining WHO is funding any anti-global-warming studies should really investigate who (Govt & Left Wingers) have funded the many, many expensive Global Warming scientific studies for several decades?
Comment: #6
Posted by: Jim Pickering
Thu Apr 16, 2015 6:36 PM
Already have an account? Log in.
New Account  
Your Name:
Your E-mail:
Your Password:
Confirm Your Password:

Please allow a few minutes for your comment to be posted.

Enter the numbers to the right: comments policy
Thomas Sowell
Apr. `15
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
29 30 31 1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 30 1 2
About the author About the author
Write the author Write the author
Printer friendly format Printer friendly format
Email to friend Email to friend
View by Month
Authorís Podcast
Lawrence Kudlow
Lawrence KudlowUpdated 18 Apr 2015
Brent Bozell
Linda Chavez
Linda ChavezUpdated 17 Apr 2015

17 Jul 2007 After Iraq: Part II

19 Nov 2013 A Very Dangerous Game

16 Oct 2007 Sabotage in Wartime