Too Often, Consensus Means Rubbish
posted at 10:52 pm on July 5, 2010 by Jimmie Bise, Jr
Among the shibboleths of the left, there is none greater than “consensus”. Like Tolkien’s One Ring, it binds the left together with smooth promises of easy decisions gained by wielding the power of experts but in the end leaves them betrayed and bitter. We’ve seen this happen in the global warming debate where the “consensus” we were told was as solid as a block of granite collapsed the second someone closely examined it. Consensus is killing the Gulf Coast as bureaucrats rally around the regulations books and ignore both common sense and reasonable proposals.
And now, once again, the consensus of the experts has turned out to be a humongous load of codswollop. Almost a year ago, a Scottish judge released Abdelbaset Ali Mohmet al-Megrahi to return to his home in Libya. The judge believed, based on the “firm consensus” of medical experts, that Megrahi would soon be dead of cancer and released him on a humanitarian exception. The release set Megrahi free of a life sentence for his part in the murder of 270 people in and over Lockerbie, Scotland in 1988.
Dr. Karol Sikora, who assessed Megrahi and whose opinion helped inform the judge who released the killer on sympathetic grounds, let the cat out of the bag badly in an interview this weekend. It seems, according to the good doctor, that the consensus was, more or less, a fix.
Cancer specialist Professor Sikora, who assessed the 58-year-old, admitted in comments published yesterday that it was ‘embarrassing’ that Megrahi has lived much longer than expected.
He told the Sunday Times: ‘There was always a chance he could live for ten years, 20 years . . . But it’s very unusual.’
And he admitted: ‘It was clear that three months was what they were aiming for. Three months was the critical point.
‘On the balance of probabilities, I felt I could sort of justify (that).’
He denied he came any under pressure to deliver the diagnosis, but admitted: ‘It is embarrassing that he’s gone on for so long.’
“There was a 50 per cent chance that he would die in three months, but there was also a 50 per cent chance that he would live longer.”
In other words, Megrahi could either die in three months or live a very long time and there was an even chance of either one happening. The good doctor, noting that “they” (presumably the people who built the “firm consensus”) had a specific result they wanted, gave it to them.
That’s not consensus. That’s a scam. And it gulled not only the judge in Scotland, but the British and American governments. Instead of dying in a prison, Megrahi is a national hero and lives comfortably in what the Telegraph calls “a luxury villa” owned by his family.
Why, it’s almost enough to cause a man to lash out in anger, or break into song (with apologies to the fine folks of Anatevka).
When the globe is warming and we are a-frightened
We must gather experts, but what will they say?
The people will not give us more control and money
Unless we use this hockey stick.
Al Gore…Al Gore! Consensus!
The CRU…the CRU! Consensus!
There is oil lapping at the Louisiana shoreline
Birds are keeling over. Baby turtles dead.
There are lots of skimmers just o’er the horizon
Why aren’t they allowed down there?
The EPA…the EPA! Consensus!
When humanitarian motives need a reason
To carry out an action that would raise a fuss.
What do we summon like a magic password
To let a sickly terrorist go?
The Doctors — the doctors. Consensus!
(Cross-posted to The Sundries Shack)
Recently in the Green Room: