Trofim Denisovich Lysenko (1898-1976) was a Russian agronomist who believed acquired characteristics can be inherited by future generations. His theories are now called Lysenkoism as Larmarck’s theories are labeled Lamarckism (Jean-Baptist Lamarck 1744-1829). The comparison of Lysenko and Lamarck is tenuous except for the idea that an already-living plant or animal can acquire new characteristics (that it was not born with) and then pass those characteristics along to its progeny. Both beliefs are pseudo-scientific.
Giraffes don’t have long necks because their ancestors stretched their necks reaching for high-hanging fruit. Giraffes have long necks because their ancestors lived in an environment where lots of high-hanging fruit existed and those who could reach it gained survival advantages. Those who could not reach it were at a comparative disadvantage and passed along fewer offspring into the next generation. If Lysenkoism were scientific one could produce leafless plants by pulling all the leaves off an existing plant.
Lysenkoism became popular under Lenin and Stalin because it enabled a belief that socialism would create future generations of socialists. Belief in Lysenkoism was that era’s plunge into “political correctness,” a term invented by Lenin. Actually, socialism creates future generations who want to escape socialism, having seen how it ravages general well being and the human spirit.
Present day devotion to the politically correct theory of human-caused catastrophic climate change (CCC) is Lysenkoism. The claimed “science” of CCC departs from the scientific method and turns science into a political ideology. Rather that real science CCC proponents are practicing scientism, the cosmetic application of science in unwarranted situations not amenable to application of the scientific method.
The truth that it is scientism and not science that supports CCC is that there is no data to back it up which can be tested by others in an attempt to replicate it. All the so-called “data” that is available consist only of computer models that supposedly predict future climate changes. All of these models have either failed to accurately predict changes in climate or are set so far out in the future nobody alive today will be around to see the results.
Actual data would be the result of a hypothesis that had been backed up by further investigation and verified results, not mere computer models attempting to predict an unknown future.
The Economist Magazine long ago ceased to be a serious publication as it sank deep into political correctness. However, the March 2018 edition accidentally swerved into real science reporting with this statement:
OVER the past 15 years air temperatures at the Earth’s surface have been flat while greenhouse-gas emissions have continued to soar. The world added roughly 100 billion tonnes of carbon to the atmosphere between 2000 and 2010. That is about a quarter of all the CO₂ put there by humanity since 1750. And yet, as James Hansen, the head of NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies, observes, “the five-year mean global temperature has been flat for a decade.”
That’s the sort of writing you’d expect from a publication trying to accurately report on scientific topics. The CCC establishment was not happy. They were shocked that such a statement could have come from The Economist, a magazine they believed had drunk their Kool Aid and was with them all the way. As Lysenko discovered and the CCC establishment is now finding out, reality is the enemy of propaganda.
CO2 represents only 0.038% of the total atmosphere, up only 0.008% since 1945. This makes it a trace gas in the atmosphere that plants rely on for their survival. Plants consumption of CO2 and release of oxygen is what all animals, including humans, rely on for their survival.
The lead-pipe cinch that CCC is not based on real science is the practice of the CCC alarmists to always respond to their skeptics and dissenters with ad hominem attacks. That’s always the last resort of people who don’t have anything else.