Anti-denialism is no accident
A field in which the use of non-scientific modes of argument are rife is simply *not a science*. Not a science at all. It does not work. Gangsterism is incompatible with science.
For example, ‘climate science’ is not a science *at all*; as a field it does not function as a real science, it uses intimidation and coercion as a matter of routine. Therefore nothing in it can be trusted, the good and bad cannot be discriminated.
To clarify - because in general terms climate science does not settle disputes using scientific methods, but by using extra-scientific methods, therefore it is not a real science, but actually is whatever the main influence on its content happens to be: politics, mostly.
The main innovation of ‘climate science’ has been to legitimate the mass use of the hate-term ‘denialism’ to signal who ‘deserves’ a punishment-beating from the gang.
Let us call the phenomenon of labeling and beating up ‘denialists’ by the name of ‘anti-denialism’.
Anti-denialism is no accident, nor is it eradicable without massive reform because anti-denialism is functionally necessary for the cohesion of modern bureaucratic pseudo-science. Without victims to gang-up on, the gangs would fall apart into warring sects. They would fight each other because these gangs are composed of ignorant, egotistical, power-worshipping adolescents. What best holds such people together is pure hatred, and pure hatred needs victims.
http://charltonteach...lysenkoism.html
The reason for so much ignorant disrespect in science is mostly that there is so much ignorance, due to the abundance of low quality people and their micro-specialized perspective. Such have no concept of excellence higher than the standard, prevailing technical practices of their micro-discipline; anyone who does not adhere to these prevailing practices is regarded as either incompetent or wicked - hence despicable hence deserving of punishment. They deserve ‘what is coming to them’ – in gang parlance.
The gangsters of pseudo-science
Started by
stocks
, Jul 10 2010 05:01 PM
4 replies to this topic
#1
stocks
-
- Traders-Talk User
- 4,550 posts
Member
Posted 10 July 2010 - 05:01 PM
-- -
Defenders of the status quo are always stronger than reformers seeking change,
UNTIL the status quo self-destructs from its own corruption, and the reformers are free to build on its ashes.
Defenders of the status quo are always stronger than reformers seeking change,
UNTIL the status quo self-destructs from its own corruption, and the reformers are free to build on its ashes.
#2
stocks
-
- Traders-Talk User
- 4,550 posts
Member
Posted 13 November 2010 - 07:23 AM
The Danger of Namecalling
If the evidence is overwhelming, obvious, and even the village idiot can see that, why can’t two Nobel Physics Prize winners, four elite Astronauts, hundreds of eminent scientists, and thousands of PhD’s?
“Denier”
Namecalling is a technique to silence dissent. It rubbishes opinions, dissuades people from speaking up, and reinforces the false “supremacy” of the team who resorts to using it. “Denier” gives license to college drop outs to scorn professors of meteorology.
To see just how mindlessly puerile “denier” is, try the thought experiment of putting those-who-use-it in the same room as one of the more notable “deniers”.
James Cameron, a film director uses denier in the most denigrating terms. So imagine he’s in a room talking with, say, Ivar Giaever who has declared he is skeptical of man-made global warming. Cameron’s only qualification is finishing high school, while Giaever got a PhD in theoretical physics when Cameron was nine, and won a Nobel Prize in Physics ten years before anyone had even heard of Cameron. Picture them meeting face to face, and Giaever talking atmospheric physics while Cameron says: 'Anybody that is a global-warming denier at this point in time has got their head so deeply up their {bleeeep} I'm not sure they could hear me.'
It makes a mockery of a civilized conversation. The cave-man mocks the particle physicist.
Think about the literal meaning of the phrase “climate denier”. Imagine how stupid someone would have to be to deny that we have a climate… As long as newspapers, politicians and scientists propagate this mindless phrase they rubbish the English language, trash the highest scientific offices, and promote the heckling domineers who spout inanities. Any organization or individual who uses the term is a part of the attack machine that eats away the pillars of human achievement.
http://scienceandpub...tery_solved.pdf
If the evidence is overwhelming, obvious, and even the village idiot can see that, why can’t two Nobel Physics Prize winners, four elite Astronauts, hundreds of eminent scientists, and thousands of PhD’s?
“Denier”
Namecalling is a technique to silence dissent. It rubbishes opinions, dissuades people from speaking up, and reinforces the false “supremacy” of the team who resorts to using it. “Denier” gives license to college drop outs to scorn professors of meteorology.
To see just how mindlessly puerile “denier” is, try the thought experiment of putting those-who-use-it in the same room as one of the more notable “deniers”.
James Cameron, a film director uses denier in the most denigrating terms. So imagine he’s in a room talking with, say, Ivar Giaever who has declared he is skeptical of man-made global warming. Cameron’s only qualification is finishing high school, while Giaever got a PhD in theoretical physics when Cameron was nine, and won a Nobel Prize in Physics ten years before anyone had even heard of Cameron. Picture them meeting face to face, and Giaever talking atmospheric physics while Cameron says: 'Anybody that is a global-warming denier at this point in time has got their head so deeply up their {bleeeep} I'm not sure they could hear me.'
It makes a mockery of a civilized conversation. The cave-man mocks the particle physicist.
Think about the literal meaning of the phrase “climate denier”. Imagine how stupid someone would have to be to deny that we have a climate… As long as newspapers, politicians and scientists propagate this mindless phrase they rubbish the English language, trash the highest scientific offices, and promote the heckling domineers who spout inanities. Any organization or individual who uses the term is a part of the attack machine that eats away the pillars of human achievement.
http://scienceandpub...tery_solved.pdf
-- -
Defenders of the status quo are always stronger than reformers seeking change,
UNTIL the status quo self-destructs from its own corruption, and the reformers are free to build on its ashes.
Defenders of the status quo are always stronger than reformers seeking change,
UNTIL the status quo self-destructs from its own corruption, and the reformers are free to build on its ashes.
#3
stocks
-
- Traders-Talk User
- 4,550 posts
Member
Posted 14 November 2010 - 06:46 AM
An example of the nonsense phrase "climate denial" from the NY TimesThink about the literal meaning of the phrase “climate denier”. Imagine how stupid someone would have to be to deny that we have a climate… As long as newspapers, politicians and scientists propagate this mindless phrase they rubbish the English language, trash the highest scientific offices, and promote the heckling domineers who spout inanities. Any organization or individual who uses the term is a part of the attack machine that eats away the pillars of human achievement.
In Climate Denial, Again
http://www.nytimes.c...8mon1.html?_r=3
-- -
Defenders of the status quo are always stronger than reformers seeking change,
UNTIL the status quo self-destructs from its own corruption, and the reformers are free to build on its ashes.
Defenders of the status quo are always stronger than reformers seeking change,
UNTIL the status quo self-destructs from its own corruption, and the reformers are free to build on its ashes.
#4
stocks
-
- Traders-Talk User
- 4,550 posts
Member
Posted 19 December 2010 - 04:42 PM
Eisenhower's farewell address -- 1961
"a government contract becomes virtually a substitute for intellectual curiosity"
Yet, in holding scientific research and discovery in respect, as we should, we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific-technological elite. The prospect of domination of the nation's scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present and is gravely to be regarded.
"a government contract becomes virtually a substitute for intellectual curiosity"
Yet, in holding scientific research and discovery in respect, as we should, we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific-technological elite. The prospect of domination of the nation's scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present and is gravely to be regarded.
-- -
Defenders of the status quo are always stronger than reformers seeking change,
UNTIL the status quo self-destructs from its own corruption, and the reformers are free to build on its ashes.
Defenders of the status quo are always stronger than reformers seeking change,
UNTIL the status quo self-destructs from its own corruption, and the reformers are free to build on its ashes.
#5
stocks
-
- Traders-Talk User
- 4,550 posts
Member
Posted 03 July 2015 - 03:38 PM
Gangsterism is incompatible with science.
The main innovation of ‘climate science’ has been to legitimate the mass use of the hate-term ‘denialism’ to signal who ‘deserves’ a punishment-beating from the gang.
‘Climate science’ is not a science at all; it does not function as a real science. It uses intimidation and coercion as a matter of routine. Therefore nothing in it can be trusted, the good and bad cannot be discriminated.
Because in general terms climate science does not settle disputes using scientific methods, it is not a real science.
Without victims to gang-up on, the gangs would fall apart into warring sects. They would fight each other because these gangs are composed of ignorant, egotistical, power-worshipping adolescents. What best holds such people together is pure hatred, and pure hatred needs victims.
http://charltonteach...lysenkoism.html
The main innovation of ‘climate science’ has been to legitimate the mass use of the hate-term ‘denialism’ to signal who ‘deserves’ a punishment-beating from the gang.
‘Climate science’ is not a science at all; it does not function as a real science. It uses intimidation and coercion as a matter of routine. Therefore nothing in it can be trusted, the good and bad cannot be discriminated.
Because in general terms climate science does not settle disputes using scientific methods, it is not a real science.
Without victims to gang-up on, the gangs would fall apart into warring sects. They would fight each other because these gangs are composed of ignorant, egotistical, power-worshipping adolescents. What best holds such people together is pure hatred, and pure hatred needs victims.
http://charltonteach...lysenkoism.html
-- -
Defenders of the status quo are always stronger than reformers seeking change,
UNTIL the status quo self-destructs from its own corruption, and the reformers are free to build on its ashes.
Defenders of the status quo are always stronger than reformers seeking change,
UNTIL the status quo self-destructs from its own corruption, and the reformers are free to build on its ashes.
