In recent years, math has become a weapon of social and political warfare. Often it is abused to promote junk science like the myth of global cooling, warming, err…climate change or whatever the hell they’re claiming this week. Numerical manipulation is also used as a tool to find new and creative reasons to get more grant money pumped into academia.
68 Percent Error
Here’s an example. Did you know that 68 percent of the universe does not exist and never did?
Remember “Dark Matter”? In 1998, scientists invented it to explain observations made by the Hubble telescope. Supposedly, 68 percent of our universe is made of it. “We are much more certain what dark matter is not than we are what it is.” — NASA
Yes, it’s still the gospel if you look on the NASA website, but there’s no such thing. Two years ago, a study was published that proved it is a false theory but it is still taught as true in schools all over the world.
Scientists believe that enigmatic dark energy make up 68% of the universe. But according to a Hungarian-American team, it may not exist at all. The team publish their results in a paper in Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society. The researchers believe that standard models of the universe fail to take account of its changing structure, but that once this is done the need for dark energy disappears.
Dark matter is now thought to make up 27% of the content of universe (in contrast ‘ordinary’ matter amounts to only 5%). After observing the explosions called as Ia supernovae, scientists concluded that dark energy, made up 68% of the cosmos, and is responsible for expansion of the universe.
In the new work, the researchers, officially led by PhD student Gábor Rácz of Eötvös Loránd University in Hungary, explained that models of cosmology particularly rely on approximations that ignore its structure, and where matter is assumed to have a uniform density. They questioned the conventional concept of existence of dark energy and suggest an alternative explanation.New Study Suggests 68 Percent Of The Universe May Not Actually Exist
Dr László Dobos, co-author of the paper, and currently working at Eötvös Loránd University, explains: “Einstein’s equations of general relativity that describe the expansion of the universe are so complex mathematically that for a hundred years no solutions accounting for the effect of cosmic structures have been found. We know from very precise supernova observations that the universe is accelerating, but at the same time we rely on coarse approximations to Einstein’s equations which may introduce serious side-effects, such as the need for dark energy, in the models designed to fit the observational data.”
If you keep rooting around on the subject, what you find is that scientists studying the universe rounded the speed of light and took other shortcuts in their math that introduced an error so big that they had to invent 68 percent more mass in the universe called “dark matter”; theoretical stuff that could not be observed in any way, just to account for the error.
Labor Department Revision
The US Department of Labor this week offered their own version of “Dark Matter” revisions to their universe.
This week, the US Department of Labor did some similar math adjustments and made 501,000 jobs that they said had been created by the Trump Administration disappear.
The Labor Department revised down total job gains from April 2018 to March 2019 by 501,000, the agency said Wednesday, the largest downward revision in a decade.US has half a million fewer jobs than believed after big government revision
The agency’s annual benchmark revision is based on state unemployment insurance records that reflect actual payrolls while its earlier estimates are derived from surveys. The preliminary figure could be revised further early next year.
Labor revised down leisure and hospitality payrolls by 175,000 and business services by 163,000. Retail employment was revised down by 146,400.
U.S. Payrolls Count Reduced by 501,000 in Year Through March
The Department maketh up and the Department taketh away, blessed be the math of the Department.
Folks, color me skeptical about this revision. I think the Labor Department has been cooking the books since Bush was President and they certainly were when Obama was President so why the change in methodology for just one year? Oh, coincidentally, this revision comes when Democrats finally figured-out that the only prayer they have in 2020 is if the economy goes down before the election—which they also are coincidentally trying to make happen.
“What’s good for the goose is good for the gander” as my dear departed granny used to say. Why stop at one year? If the Labor Department wants to change their methodology let’s go back, say ten years and see what has really been going on.
Bureaucracy First
Folks this is an illustration of what some folks dumbly call the “Deep State”. Personally I hate that term. I think what they are trying to say is that, in a sense, the government bureaucracy is so large and unwieldly that it is a force unto itself that can’t be led anywhere its career management is unwilling to go. Above all things, they are statists and will defend their institution from any outside forces of change.
Trump is an insurgent and as such needs to be taken down a few notches and shown who is running things. The boys in Labor decided that the time is ripe to make their contribution to the cause and it’s substantial. Trump has wed his fate to that of the economy and now is the time to stick him with it.
As I have stated before Trump is more of a cheerleader for the economy than he is an actual owner of its success or failure. The Market is overvalued and needs correction but how and what will trigger that is yet to happen. Sadly, the possible catalysts of correction are a target rich environment. The real question is will Trump advocate interfering with the Market (like Bush) or allow it to correct itself. Given that Democrats will not willingly help Trump, as Republicans were willing to do for Obama, Trump may have no choice but to let the Market correct naturally —which in the long run is the best outcome.
I’m just surprised that this story has gotten so little attention. Are Democrats really so busy fighting amongst themselves that they can’t take time to pummel Trump on his claim that “this is the greatest economy ever” or are they just so tone-deaf that it doesn’t matter to them. On the other hand, in the Dem’s defense, the revision was a loss of private sector, non-union jobs so maybe they don’t count anyways.
From my point of view, this was a real body blow to the President but I can’t find anything from pundits on either side of the political divide make hay about this revision.
So if Trump doesn’t lash-out at his own Dept. of Labor on Twitter then the media doesn’t care? What gives with that?