Yep. I like this piece. On the account of agreeing with it. Plenty of intellectual elites out there completely oppose this perspective, however, and that is amusing.
Truly thought provoking; and couldn’t agree more…… wish Sagan was still around to have this conversation on the world stage. We need a true leader to emerge and speak these truths
Try this: Whenever you hear or see the word 'science' think about the context it was used in. Then think about the true meaning of the word: It's a method for finding a few truth pearls in a sea full of oysters.
I've been doing this for a long time and the biggest problem I have with the word is that it's most often used as a synonym for truth, not a method. Used this way, you are being tricked to believe because you are smart, and science is truth, that you need no further exploration: just accept what I say because 'the science is ...'.
Also, why have some school courses been called 'science' ever since I was grade schooler many decades ago? They were not about the scientific method. They were about stars, and weather and dissecting frogs. Was this just another convenient truth label for people who were tired of old religious myths and eager to be truth seekers?
Have read this now 4 or 5 times. Always come back to this to remind me that to question something is good. Skepticism is healthy. Its very unsettling today to have to remind oneself of this.
There's an old video on YouTube of Fletcher Prouty discussing the term "Fossil fuel" and how in the days of Rockefeller, it was advantageous to have the public believe it came from fossils and was therefore rare and we could soon run out. He and PhD brainiac Arthur Kantrowitz were apparently amused at the silliness of what most geologists still believe. We drill for oil below 30,000 ft, which still raises the question of whether this hypothesis/theory can ever be put to rest. If Kantrowitz was alive today, would he still be rolling his eyes ?
This will seem a bit incongruous to the editors of Doomberg, who do this for pay, but this piece should be made fully accessible to the public. I read the first portion and subscribed to the basic service. When I used to write a blog, I wrote it with what I considered "rich content", meaning I supplied links that supported my point of view or critical facts in an argument I was making. This is a post any rational human being can learn from. Thanks for writing it.
Excellent assessment. You may want to explore Gettr, Locals, and Odysee as alternative/supplementary portals. Unfortunately, science x politics = politics; not political science. Once we pass the event horizon of the political black hole, we are spaghettified as we are sucked into the singularity from which there is no escape.
Ok Doomberg, put your research where your beak is! All said here is so true, and yet I fear it’s all for naught.
We must actually apply the knowledge we have, that the scientific method both builds upon and questions that knowledge in order to improve its applications within the reality we experience. The recognition of and adaptation to phase transitions isn’t easy or common but yields new realities of possible knowledge. Examples of Newtonian, Relativity, and Quantum physics demonstrate this process and utility.
Now our challenge is to use our collective self knowledge that we are psycho/socially flawed creatures, not reliably capable of individually producing good outcomes from positions of levered power, to question the assumptions that have lead us to the situation where a few individuals, say the leaders of the US, Russia, North Korea, etc. could make such catastrophic decisions in increasingly shorter time frames that we might have to test a nuclear winter hypothesis by experiment. Clearly the political sphere of human behavior is toxic to most people involved in it and too often correlated to the time and/or influence they experience within it.
So please, research me this! What solutions for human collective behavior are appropriate for the new phase transitioned state of our species where we must question all forms of governance (names like democracy, communism, autocracy, all seem irrelevant to their ultimate outcomes) as inappropriate for the scale of influence their structure demands of us?
Capitalism is insufficient as a structure when elements within it become capable and aware of the fact that their best competitive advantage lies in usurped political influence.
How can we understand this predicament where techno-social Darwinism has promoted our species to the Peter Principle pinnacle of perhaps fatal incompetence? Is it possible to bootstrap our way off the ledge and down to a grounded position of cooperative evolution with each other and the planet that may still sustain us?
…..Otherwise!….thanks for your good work and I’ll enjoy adding it to my game….of playing three dimensional chess from my deck chair…on the Titanic.
"One does not have to wonder how Professor Singer would be treated by YouTube..."
No, one does not have to wonder because the hypothesis can be back tested. A search for "Fred Singer Climate Change" on YouTube yields many results but also a banner I've never seen before. It reads: "Context; Climate Change; United Nations; Climate change refers to long-term shifts in temperatures and weather patterns, mainly caused by human activities, especially the burning of fossil fuels."
Demonetization? Thumb on the scale, you say? The most-viewed video has 17k views - just slightly less than a video of a pig startled by a weed whacker.
Yep. I like this piece. On the account of agreeing with it. Plenty of intellectual elites out there completely oppose this perspective, however, and that is amusing.
Bingo.
Truly thought provoking; and couldn’t agree more…… wish Sagan was still around to have this conversation on the world stage. We need a true leader to emerge and speak these truths
Try this: Whenever you hear or see the word 'science' think about the context it was used in. Then think about the true meaning of the word: It's a method for finding a few truth pearls in a sea full of oysters.
I've been doing this for a long time and the biggest problem I have with the word is that it's most often used as a synonym for truth, not a method. Used this way, you are being tricked to believe because you are smart, and science is truth, that you need no further exploration: just accept what I say because 'the science is ...'.
Also, why have some school courses been called 'science' ever since I was grade schooler many decades ago? They were not about the scientific method. They were about stars, and weather and dissecting frogs. Was this just another convenient truth label for people who were tired of old religious myths and eager to be truth seekers?
Have read this now 4 or 5 times. Always come back to this to remind me that to question something is good. Skepticism is healthy. Its very unsettling today to have to remind oneself of this.
How did we get here?
There's an old video on YouTube of Fletcher Prouty discussing the term "Fossil fuel" and how in the days of Rockefeller, it was advantageous to have the public believe it came from fossils and was therefore rare and we could soon run out. He and PhD brainiac Arthur Kantrowitz were apparently amused at the silliness of what most geologists still believe. We drill for oil below 30,000 ft, which still raises the question of whether this hypothesis/theory can ever be put to rest. If Kantrowitz was alive today, would he still be rolling his eyes ?
This will seem a bit incongruous to the editors of Doomberg, who do this for pay, but this piece should be made fully accessible to the public. I read the first portion and subscribed to the basic service. When I used to write a blog, I wrote it with what I considered "rich content", meaning I supplied links that supported my point of view or critical facts in an argument I was making. This is a post any rational human being can learn from. Thanks for writing it.
There isn't a 'like' button big enough to express how much I liked it!
Would love a climate change piece.
There should be no third rails in the land of Doom.
Wow, you’ve hit the nail on the head with this one… highest “liked” article by a factor >2
Excellent assessment. You may want to explore Gettr, Locals, and Odysee as alternative/supplementary portals. Unfortunately, science x politics = politics; not political science. Once we pass the event horizon of the political black hole, we are spaghettified as we are sucked into the singularity from which there is no escape.
Ok Doomberg, put your research where your beak is! All said here is so true, and yet I fear it’s all for naught.
We must actually apply the knowledge we have, that the scientific method both builds upon and questions that knowledge in order to improve its applications within the reality we experience. The recognition of and adaptation to phase transitions isn’t easy or common but yields new realities of possible knowledge. Examples of Newtonian, Relativity, and Quantum physics demonstrate this process and utility.
Now our challenge is to use our collective self knowledge that we are psycho/socially flawed creatures, not reliably capable of individually producing good outcomes from positions of levered power, to question the assumptions that have lead us to the situation where a few individuals, say the leaders of the US, Russia, North Korea, etc. could make such catastrophic decisions in increasingly shorter time frames that we might have to test a nuclear winter hypothesis by experiment. Clearly the political sphere of human behavior is toxic to most people involved in it and too often correlated to the time and/or influence they experience within it.
So please, research me this! What solutions for human collective behavior are appropriate for the new phase transitioned state of our species where we must question all forms of governance (names like democracy, communism, autocracy, all seem irrelevant to their ultimate outcomes) as inappropriate for the scale of influence their structure demands of us?
Capitalism is insufficient as a structure when elements within it become capable and aware of the fact that their best competitive advantage lies in usurped political influence.
How can we understand this predicament where techno-social Darwinism has promoted our species to the Peter Principle pinnacle of perhaps fatal incompetence? Is it possible to bootstrap our way off the ledge and down to a grounded position of cooperative evolution with each other and the planet that may still sustain us?
…..Otherwise!….thanks for your good work and I’ll enjoy adding it to my game….of playing three dimensional chess from my deck chair…on the Titanic.
Should Substack ban you. I will create your own website free of charge.
"One does not have to wonder how Professor Singer would be treated by YouTube..."
No, one does not have to wonder because the hypothesis can be back tested. A search for "Fred Singer Climate Change" on YouTube yields many results but also a banner I've never seen before. It reads: "Context; Climate Change; United Nations; Climate change refers to long-term shifts in temperatures and weather patterns, mainly caused by human activities, especially the burning of fossil fuels."
Demonetization? Thumb on the scale, you say? The most-viewed video has 17k views - just slightly less than a video of a pig startled by a weed whacker.
i am so very glad i found your material
I am so grateful to have found you. I learn something with every read.