When I went to University to do Physics I knew that physics was unlikely to be a career in its own right, but instead it was a means of problem analysis that was applicable to many areas of life. It was, I was taught at school, the fundamental methodology of science:
- gather the evidence
- Review it impartially
- Formulate hypothesis
- Test them
It seems to me that it is stating the obvious, that if you are investigating something, you don’t start from the premise “the human race are destroying planet earth” and expect to get a scientific conclusion any more than you would if you started from the premise that “The English are genocidal maniacs who annihilated an entire population“.
Those kinds of statements, seem to be a tad biased!
Yet, the first has more or less been endorsed by almost every academic who calls themselves a “scientist” and the second by almost every academic who calls themselves an historian, archaeologist & linguists. It is hard to think of any subject that hasn’t in some way bought into one or other of these.
And if you have never heard of the evidence that English is indigenous to England or are inclined to accept the excuse that genocide of a complete welsh-speaking population not just in England, but also in celtic-Gaul (France) as well as all most of the rest of Europe which was supposedly “celtic”, then please read this website:
There summary puts their case well:
Let there be no doubt:
- there is no historical proof whatsoever that the Anglo-Saxons imported English.
- there is on the contrary ample evidence that English is native to England.
We will also challenge the very existence of Celts as a distinct people with a distinct language, but not the existence of a Celtic culture. In fact we discovered an error of interpretation of the known facts and sources so big that everybody missed it until today.
We detected a stunning circular reasoning which is still used by modern historians who are specialized in Celtic language, history and culture.
So, let’s compare the Global Warming theory with that of a genocidal English speakers and their Germanic speaking counterparts that are supposed to have wiped out a welsh speaking population from most of France (this is the place where the Romans tell us the celts were located), from all the rest of Europe and from most of Britain (except the left hand side which”by miracle” 2500 years earlier was the location of the separate Megalithic culture)
|Global Warming||British language|
|Humans activity will destroy the earth||The genocide by English annihilated a previous welsh speaking population after Roman occupation.|
|Reason for belief||A chance warming period from 1970-2000 coinciding with rising wealth and CO2 emissions||A chance immigration of a small number of “Anglo-Saxons” coinciding with the date of the earliest Germanic texts.|
|Actual Position||No warming for 18 years||English contains almost no early words from Welsh (or Irish) that would be found if there were Welsh (or Irish) speakers in England at any time.|
|Null Hypothesis||Business as usual.
That natural climate variation was responsible for 1970-2000 warming as it is agreed it was responsible for 1910-1940 warming.
|Business as usual.
That the indigenous population in the English speaking regions of Britain always spoke a language like early English.
|Response when asked for proof requiring us to reject null hypothesis||Denial and highlighting consensus||Denial and
|Explanation of lack of evidence||The heat is hiding in the oceans||Welsh is hidden by genocide: the (few) Anglo-Saxons supposedly annihilated the population|
|What the evidence shows regarding excuse||No one has been able to show the heat is real.||Archaeological evidence does not show the necessary genocide and DNA evidence points to continuity of populations|
|The burden of proof||On sceptics to prove the negative:
that warming was not man-made
|On sceptics to prove the negative:
that there were no Welsh or Irish in England, France and rest of Europe
Notice how scepticism and arguing from the evidence is rejected whilst those asserting their view cite no evidence other than to point to consensus and “established positions”.
It is really concerning that two areas where I have happened to investigate in depth are so alike. This enforces my view that there is a systematic bias in academia and a lack of rigour in their approach to both subjects.
Those that have studied the Global Warming campaign know that it is largely a political movement. It was a way to unify the Greens (who lost their cause celeb when the Berlin wall came down) with the anti-capitalists. They chose a common enemy: oil and coal which in their entirely different way symbolised progress and prosperity – a hatred that could unify their causes against a common enemy (and coincidentally one which gave that energy huge profits as fossil fuel prices rose and that price hike went into rising fossil fuel sector profits).
But it is the same for the “celtic” myth. It, like global warming, was adopted mainly for political reasons and has never been supported by the evidence. This snippet from Michael Goormachtigh & Dr Anthony Durham website “How old is English” explains it well:
Simon James(University of Leicester) reminds us that the theory of the introduction of English was established in the 17th century under James I to suit the political needs of the time. The union of the crowns of Scotland and England was explained as re-union of (Celtic) Britain. State paid historians stated that Britain was ‘Celtic’ before the Roman age. They made no distinction between Celtic art or culture and Celtic language. Strange, because it was already known that the Romans had adopted Greek culture, but not their language. They presumed the existence of a Celtic language  all over Britain. This theory was immediately officially accepted for it came handy to quieten the critics who were against unification. The latter argued that the Scots always had been the eternal enemies of the English.
So, like global warming, the celtic myth was adopted without any proof is kept going by endless funds for “research” based on this myth and is now largely supported by groups of activists and zealots who shout down opponents, ignore the growing evidence against their views and generally make me despair that western education is capable of original and evidence based thinking any longer.