When I was younger, I loved science. I think it was because of the amazing knowledge that the disciplined examination of the world produced- quantum physics, chemistry and so on.

But something happened along the way. Sure, chemists kept doing chemistry and physicists kept on producing weirder and weirder insights in to the universe. But science was being hijacked by causes and new “disciplines” sprang up with non-scientific names and practices, usually with words such as environmental, social or sustainable tacked onto the title.

Science became politicised and, with the clmate catastrophe, turned into a religion. Now there are certain things which may not be said, even if they are true. Censored science is anti-science.

So we come to this, from Jo Nova:

Science paper doubts IPCC, so whole journal gets terminated!

…

In extraordinary news, the scientific journal Pattern Recognition in Physics has been unexpectedly terminated, a “drastic decision” taken just ten months after it started.

The publisher appears to be shocked that in a recent special issue the scientists expressed doubt about the accelerated warming predicted by the IPCC. For the crime of not bowing before the sacred tabernacle, apparently the publishers suddenly felt the need to distance themselves, and in the most over-the-top way. The reasons they gave had nothing to do with the data, the logic, and they cite no errors. There can be no mistake, this is about enforcing a permitted line of thought.

I must say, it’s a brilliant (if a tad expensive) way to draw attention to a scientific paper. It’s the Barbara-Streisland moment in science. Forget “withdrawn”, forget “retracted”, the new line in the sand is to write a paper so hot they have to terminate the whole journal! Skeptics could hardly come up with a more electric publicity campaign.

Naturally, as with all good Barbara-Streisland-moves intended to suppress information, as soon as I heard, the first thing I did was to seek out and download copies of all the papers. Right now, people everywhere would be starting to do the same, curious to know what could be so unsayable. (See the links at the bottom).

In the official announcement the excuses are amazingly transparent. There is little attempt to cover up the reasons. The publisher pays the usual lip service saying science needs disputes and discussion of controversial topics. But some things are apparently too awful to contemplate — like pointing out how the high priests of the IPCC might be incorrect.

Read the full, disturbing story here