During an event on the South Lawn of the White House, actor Leonardo DiCaprio asserted that no one should be able to hold public office unless they believe in climate change.
DiCaprio is not known for his academic prowess (as a high school drop out who later earned a GED) but to mouth lines which are fed to him. And the closest to nature sciences in his adult experience may be being the principle actor in The Revenant. Still, as a celebrity, his words have tremendous resonance so it is worth unpacking them.
While DiCaprio statement was not specific, he presumably was referring to anthropogenic (man-made) global warning, as that is the only thing that our actions can effectively control. Well, perhaps "Dr." DiCaprio can offer better proofs than Sierra Club President Alan Mair was able to do in 2015 Senate testimony on how there is global warming when there have been sixteen straight years of no rising global temperatures (known as "The Pause").
DiCaprio relies on scientific consensus. The statistic is that 97% of scientists believe in climate change. Yet a 2014 Friends of Science report debunked this statistic after doing a review of the four main studies used to document this alleged consensus. The reality is that only 1-3% of respondents explicitly stated that they agreed with the IPCC view and there was no agreement on the catastrophic view.
French Mathematicians evaluated whether the IPCC's conclusions of climate change would be acceptable for academic publication. The Societe de Calcul Mathematique wrote:"The IPCC's report fails to respect the fundamental rules of scientific research and could not be published in any review with a reading panel." But when Big Science becomes politicized, it is easy to usurp power from the people using ambphbologies.
Pro argumento, considering the climate change studies that are prevalent, there are some problems. An Australian former climate change modeler noted that the IPCC model was skewed and overestimated CO2 levels by a factor of 10. And let's not forget how the scientists from East Anglia intentionally fudged the numbers to push their flawed Hockey Stick model ,
One must not discount the pecuniary interests in proclaiming climate change (modified from global warning and cries of a coming ice age in the 1970s) as catastrophic predictions tend to win more governmental funding for studies. And as Rahm Emmanuel's political philosophy asserts: "Never let a good crisis go to waste."
If there is no disputing a scientific "fact", then there would be a test that is a proof. What is that proof for climate change? Of course, there is none, so it is a theory. We may ascribe more credence to it based upon supporting data, but it is just a theory. To proclaim it as an unassailable belief, then it is a secular religion.
DiCaprio's dictat for fitness for public office is at odds with Federal Law, which specifically prohibits having a religious test for office. But the rule of law does not stop liberalism. Thomas Sowell notes that: "Liberalism is totalitarianism with a human face."
Still, celebutards cry out the claxon call for climate change. Homer Simpson may have vocalized it best: "Is there anything that celebrities do not know?" Well, yes. Ecce homo-- Leonardo DiCaprio.