Joe Rogan and Adam Frank on the political polarization of science.
Video Source
20 Comments
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Joe Rogan and Adam Frank on the political polarization of science.
Video Source
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Ya know….
Why do some smart people, end every statement with a cheap, soft sales tie down?
It’s a fact the earth heats up in giant cycles and goes into ice ages afterwards. Nobody is saying climate change isn’t affected by humans the question is how much and you’re telling me if humans went totally green the earth would not heat up and go into the coming ice age? The question of how much we affect it is valid. Like I’ve commented before , quantum physics was known as a fact and scientists were politicized and if they admitted quantum theory was real, they got kicked out of their colleges and lost funding and got their careers ruined. That happened for decades. The irony is that they act like the scientific community can’t be compromised, how naive. Before Einstein’s figures out e=mc squared , he was told not to get into physics because it was all figured out. Just like the idea that few scientists had that the earth was the center of the universe was pushed as scientific fact for a while, that had some scientists backing it for their own reasons. These guys are acting totally ignorant. Science is meant to be questioned. The cigarette companies didn’t get away with it on their own they had… wait for it… scientists and doctors saying it wasn’t bad for you.
Al Gore’s little vanity project caused or at least ramped up the politicization on this subject. It was the moment that people who were already inclined to doubt went full conspiracy theory. And not without some good reason, based on Gore’s record and associations. If we don’t want science politicized, polarizing political figures, celebrities, and monied interests should have the restraint to leave the presentation of hard science to actual scientists. Scientists should resist the urge to be overtly political.
Experience at professional pretending or seeking power doesn’t equate to a physics degree.
A physics degree doesn’t make you a competent leader of large groups of people. I would assert that the qualities that inform the two disciplines are uncomfortable companions.
Scientists can properly defend their research from a standpoint of deep knowledge. All that the “charismatic advocates” do is muddy the water and create polarization.
So a “professor” from university of Washington is saying it’s not political. I can’t help you if you don’t see the irony in this. I wonder if he has tenure yet?