Diary

Liberals were Blacklisting Good American Scientists Long before President Trump

In this Tuesday, May 15, 2018, photo, scientist Fabrice De Bond opens the lid of a cryotank containing donor sperm samples in a lab at Melbourne IVF in Melbourne, Australia. (AP Photo/Wong Maye-E)

Jon McCloskey, PhD 

 

“In the End, we will remember not the words of our enemies, but the silence of our friends.”Martin Luther King, Jr.

 

The story of one blacklisted scientist may seem unimportant in light of the events of the last week and the last four years, but the leftists are now threatening to blacklist millions of other people simply because they supported an honest President. What Americans are now experiencing due to the draconian measures taken by the toxic administrative state, my family has endured for nearly 10 years. For 10 years, I tried to tell others that if the administrative state (and academia) are willing to destroy the lives of one family, they will not hesitate to destroy the lives of anyone else who does not go along with their agenda (and there are millions of people who do not). Nobody would listen. It took the fallout of a pandemic and the attempted theft of an election to expose what this scientist could not; without integrity, honesty, transparency, and inclusive participation, science becomes pseudo-science and decisions made using this kind of quackery will have severe consequences; our Constitutional Republic will die. Politicizing science destroys science as well as the trust of the American people.

It is important to understand that I am an average person whose livelihood and career was earned through hard work and sacrifice. I did not come from a privileged background; I joined the Navy at 18 to grow me up and give me some direction and because my grandpa was a Naval hero who won the Bronze Star in WWII. After the Navy, I worked my way through college as a blue-collar tradesman and eventually earned a PhD in Environmental Science. I worked for the Department of Interior and Department of Agriculture and published peer-reviewed scientific articles as an undergraduate in the 1990’s. I earned a B.S. degree in 1996 and an M.S. degree in 1999. In 2006, I completed my PhD dissertation, which criticized the federal government’s mismanaging of forests and wildfire (criticism that has now turned out to be prophetic). It was here that I began to notice a change in how I was treated by my colleagues in the “scientific” community. I did not know it at the time, but this was my first “mistake”.

My second “mistake” in the eyes of the scientific community came in 2007, when I put my career path on hold in order to win custody of my son to protect him from an abusive mother. Many of my so called colleagues immediately began to ostracize me for this decision. They simply couldn’t understand how I could refuse to accept an academic position thousands of miles away in order to fight and care for my son. The veil was beginning to be pulled away and the Kool-Aid was wearing off.

Despite the unforgivable crime of choosing my son over my career, I was able to secure grants to continue my research, which helped me put bread on the table. In 2010, backed by my own and others’ research and field experience, I began to speak out against the weaponization of environmental regulations and the politicization of highly uncertain environmental models. Through scientific evidence, I and other scientists showed that most conservation efforts actually disempower already underprivileged people in a community and does nothing to help “save” the environment. In 2011, I created a more inclusive and democratic land use decision making process (my work is published in several scientific articles and college textbooks). The method I created requires participation from experts and community members (not just the elite) and actually streamlines the decision making process and helps communities find common ground between conservation and development. Creating innovative solutions through applied science should be rewarded by the scientific community. Instead, the blacklist began.

You may be asking, “Why would they destroy a person’s livelihood for exposing facts about something as innocuous as land use?” To answer this question, you must first understand that land use involves natural resources, development opportunities, zoning regulations, and property values. The people who seek to destroy other people simply because they disagree with their research results are, in fact, dishonest, greedy leftists whose primary goal is power. A major path to power is controlling land use and one way they control land use is under the guise of conservation.

Conservation of our environment is a noble mission that affects people, animals, and natural resources. Unfortunately, the mission has been co-opted by elitists in order to control how and where we use the land; not to save animals or stop climate change as they claim, but to control people and the economy for their own selfish ends. If you don’t believe this, ask yourself, “Why do they refuse to follow the scientific method?” and “Why are very few endangered animal species (< 1%) actually being successfully saved?” and “Why are they blacklisting real scientists whose research contradicts the elitists agenda?”

Scientists like me have known for years that most conservation efforts are as fake as cable news, but few have the integrity and courage to speak out. Many of these fake conservation efforts are undertaken by “non-profit” organizations posing as members of a community whose mission is to “save” some part of the environment. In reality, their mission is to weaponize environmental and zoning regulations in order to increase their own property values, lower the property values of others’ in the community and then grab land and natural resources at a profitable price. Regulations such as the Endangered Species Act and Clean Water Act have been weaponized to take land from small farmers and land owners, stifle competition, and destroy small businesses. Their tactics vary, but their strategy is always the same; grab land and profit at the expense of other, less powerful people in the community. Thus, the third “mistake” I made was creating a land use decision making process that required the participation of non-traditional people from the community (i.e., not just those with power and money). When I chose my son over my career, they ostracized me. When I spoke out against fake conservation, they tried to ruin me. These are the type of people that inhabit academia and the administrative state.

The blacklist began in earnest in 2012. I had excellent references, nearly 20 years of experience, and a sound scientific publication record. I had worked in Australia, Antarctica, Kenya, China, and Tibet and never been fired from a job. In fact, I had met Elinor Ostrom (i.e., the first woman to win the Nobel Prize in Economics) in 2010 and she complemented me on my work and signed a kind and personal message in one of her books and gave it to my son. One of her colleague’s was also one of my research partners (he remains one of my few friends). Yet, by 2012, the only work I could find was in a remote area of Nevada working as a GS-11 Wildlife Biologist for the Bureau of Land Management (BLM). I hope the irony is not lost here, although at the time, nobody had heard of “Black Lives Matter”. At that time, we jokingly referred to the BLM agency as “the Bureau of Lady Managers” or “the Bureau of Lots of Meetings”, whereas now, the mission of the BLM agency and “Black Lives Matter” could easily be seen as synonymous. But I digress. In short, I was extremely overqualified for this job and it was located in a very remote area with about six thousand people, a dozen casinos, and a whore-house. Not everyone could live and raise a family in such a remote area. I was sent there on purpose.

I tried my best to make the most of my exile. You may recall this was during the time that the BLM agency was directing their power to destroy the Bundy family. I worked in the northern part of Nevada, so I did not work with the Bundy’s, but I did work with other families whose livelihood was cattle ranching. When I arrived on the job, these families had zero trust in the BLM. In one short year, I was able to secure a grant that would have provided three cattle ranching families with more than $250,000 to help them maintain their livelihood by hiring cowboys to help move cattle around and prevent them from destroying riparian areas where the cattle often congregated. This was a win-win situation for the cattle ranchers, the community, and the ecological restoration of riparian areas. The cattle ranchers were grateful and surprised that I had done this for them and wondered why it had not happened sooner. Then, the leftists pounced; the administrative state of the BLM did everything they could to stop me from going forward with the project and eventually forced me to resign my position. In hindsight, I should not have resigned, but I was raising a young son alone and both of my parents had recently died unexpectedly. I simply did not have the energy to continue the fight alone. The leftists knew this and ganged up on me and my son. Besides being deceitful, irrational, persistent, and uncompromising, they are also selfish and cold-blooded. Remember, with God out of the picture, the Atheist leftist becomes a pseudo-God (at least in their minds), much like the pseudo-scientists of academia.

I have not been allowed to work as an Environmental Scientist since 2014. I have applied for hundreds of jobs for the federal government and at various universities. During this entire time, I raised a son alone and we are all that each other has left. With the exception of a few of my mentors who are now retired, all the people that I worked with and who I thought were my friends, no longer associate with me. I am blacklisted and ostracized by a community of real people that I spent my adult life working with and for no other reason than they disagree with my scientific knowledge and my willingness to speak out against the administrative state and their politicization of science. In reality, science demands alternative working hypotheses and my critiques and solutions for wildfire management from 2006 along with my ideas for higher quality land use decisions from 2011 turned out to be correct, but are still ignored. While the leftists’ offspring (e.g., Hunter Biden, the Cuomo twins, George W. Bush, etc.) are rewarded for corruption, arrogance, and incompetence, hard working middle class people are punished for their honesty and creativity. By any real measure, I am an excellent scientist, yet I am still blacklisted and isolated. The real disappointment with what happened to me and my son is not the behavior of the administrative state, but the silence of the people I thought were my friends. I knew them to be good people and we could have easily beaten the no-talent pencil pushers.

A crucial point that needs emphasis here is that job websites like USAJOBS are now controlled by “big tech” companies. If their algorithms can be used to track and censor people and produce biased internet search results, they can (and are) easily be used to block good scientists from getting a job. In fact, decisions to hire within the federal government are now made by bloated human resource (HR) personnel most of whom were hired during the Obama years. These HR personnel have zero knowledge of the expertise needed to perform the scientific and analytical work required for these positions. In the past, the decision to hire was made by scientists or subject matter experts (SME), not pencil pushers in HR or algorithms created by programmers with no real-world experience. Even if someone is interviewed, it can take anywhere from 6-8 months to actually start work; another tactic designed to keep good scientists out. The process needs to be streamlined and made more transparent. The hiring decisions need to be returned to the actual SMEs who understand the scientific and technical requirements of the job and have the ability to match those requirements with the applicants’ qualifications and experience. The hiring decisions should be based on a meritocracy, rather than algorithms and cronyism.

I have been fighting the administrative state for nearly 10 years, long before President Trump. I tried my best to warn people that if the leftists can destroy a person like me, they will not hesitate to do the same to others. We now see this playing out in 2020. Thousands of people have had their livelihoods destroyed by bad decisions. Decisions made, not based on science, but rather made to steal power and control the American people. They have done this to police, entrepreneurs, and other middle class families. The question is: what will their friends and neighbors do to stand up for them? If even a few people had stood up for me and my son, my career would not have been destroyed. If a handful of police who protect corrupt politicians calling to “defund the police”, would band together and strike until their “leadership” rescinded these demands, it would save lives and stop these disgusting politicians in their tracks. If the people who work for federal agencies actually took seriously their oath to protect and defend the Constitution, the administrative state would not exist. If people would simply turn off cable news, the propagandists would die. It’s long past time to wake up America. President Trump cannot fight all your battles. If you don’t do something active to protect your freedoms, friends, and neighbors, how can you expect someone else to do it for you? If you stand by and watch while our Constitutional Republic is destroyed by sellouts to the CCP, then what has happened to me and my son will happen to you and yours. I have worked in Tibet and their present is our future… unless we stand up and fight. The time is NOW! God is watching.

Biography: Jon McCloskey, PhD can be reached on either twitter or Parler @Scientists4Trump. Dr. McCloskey is a U.S. Navy veteran who worked his way through college and earned his Ph.D. in Ecology and Environmental Science in 2006. He has minors in Statistics and Remote Sensing/GIS and is the author of numerous peer-reviewed scientific research articles. Dr. McCloskey has created several innovative spatial and statistical models and decision-support tools for a wide variety of professional SMEs outside of Environmental Science. Dr. McCloskey is despised by the pseudo-scientists in the Environmental “profession” for his refusal to drink the Kool-Aide and keep his mouth shut…and because he supports President Trump (they really hate that).