Jump to content
UNRV Ancient Roman Empire Forums
  • entries
    65
  • comments
    124
  • views
    60,944

I'll stick to buying just one cake

GhostOfClayton

Entry posted by GhostOfClayton

592 views

 Share
blog-0277850001448469142.jpg

Good morrow to thee, Blogees, and welcome one and all to the GhostOfClayton 'Increasing Less Frequent Than Twice-Fortnightly' blog. Comfortable? OK!

 

Horizon

 

BBC2's flagship science series 'Horizon' has been in top form of late, but the recent offering 'Science Under Attack' left me almost trembling with frustration. The aim of the programme was to highlight the current trend in society to (at best) mis-trust and (at worst) disbelieve and actively attempt to discredit the scientific majority view, and at the forefront of this seem to be the more right-wing newspapers, though they are by no means exclusive. The general tendency is for them to cherry-pick scientific data and news stories that meet their political agenda, rather than having their political agenda formed by peer-reviewed scientific study. A common tactic is to hint at some political hidden agenda among the scientific community, who are clearly plotting to invent conclusions in order to allow governments to exercise greater control over all our lives.

 

On the whole, very, very few scientists (apart from the ones who are funded by corporations) have weird little political hidden agendas. Politicians, journalists and activists have those, so who are we going to choose to listen to?

 

The majority of people will always listen to those opinions that reinforce their beliefs. It is very difficult for a human being to embrace a way of thinking that goes against what they have always (wanted to) believe. For example, many Americans choose to listen to their right wing media (e.g. Fox News) because they�re worried they may have to (say) use a smaller car if there is any truth to global warming. If the average man/woman in the street understands this concept, they tend not to alter their behaviour as a result, so the only conclusion is that they will never change.

 

I like to think of UNRV people as cognoscenti (don�t look it up � if you have to look it up, you�re not one) and so should be able to grasp the concept. UNRV people don't, however, have the time to devote to collating all the peer-reviewed research, and reading/understanding it merely to form an opinion that drives our behaviours. The science involved is too complex. Therefore we have to accept that our opinions must be guided by others. We have the choice whether that be the majority view of the scientific community, or the media. I know whose mast I shall be nailing my colours to.

 

My ire was reserved most especially for the bloody stupid hack (pardon my French) that uncovered so-called 'Climategate'. In my moment of maximum ire, I told Mrs OfClayton that if he were to be taken out and shot, I would be buying cakes! I quickly realised that this was just the sort of comment that you might hear on Fox News. So, as an egalitarian, I have reluctantly tempered my views towards him very slightly.

 Share

3 Comments

Recommended Comments

Melvadius

I didn't watch all of the programme but the report I had of this 'hacks' comments indicated his automatic assumption was that everyone is conspiring to 'hide the truth'. The fact that what was being sought by the FOI requests was not the reasonably available raw climate data but the commercially written software to collate it - which is specifically not covered by FOI rules seems to have gotten lost in the furore.

 

Irrespective of what that 'truth' may be has anyone stopped to consider how long it takes to read through umpteen thousand emails thoroughly and ask your (mummy/daddy/ non-expert of choice) what the difficult words actually mean?

 

Can I join the cake queue?

Link to comment
caldrail

The message I picked up from that program was the widening gap between those that understand science and practice it's strange dark rituals, and the public who are largely ignorant and form protest groups at the sheer mention of anything scientific going on.

 

In other words, it's a modern manifestation of superstition. The public get it into their heads that something potentially evil is going on and head straight there in a ugly crowd holding burning torches ready to set these works of the bad guys alight.

 

Funny really. Mary Shelley had the subject pretty well covered a century and a half ago. You could argue her misguided scientist was acting beyond approval, whereas moden scientists are regulated by governments to avoid inflicting the public with square headed inarticulate zombies, but once the public get suspicious and smell a rat....

Link to comment
×
×
  • Create New...