Theme: Science

  • FORCING THE CATHEDRAL TO DO PENANCE FOR THE CRIME OF YELLING WOLF FOR FUN AND PR

    https://judithcurry.com/2018/10/11/climate-uncertainty-monster-whats-the-worst-case/CLIMATE: FORCING THE CATHEDRAL TO DO PENANCE FOR THE CRIME OF YELLING WOLF FOR FUN AND PROFIT

    (for newbs: Cathedral = Academy, Media, State Complex: the new ‘church’.)

    I was directly involved and know the political end of the AGW movement (and lost a lot of money), and I think (as usual) Harrari’s argument (his book) is typical pilpul (his usual articulate bullshit).

    The people (skeptics) are punishing the academy and state for their handling of the issue. That’s what’s going on. They are forcing the academy and state to do penance for suppressing the counter-research, doing shoddy research, pursuing grant money by fraud, and trying to move to the left in by seizing the opportunity.

    And my opinion is that it should be criminal to act as the academy and state did in this matter, and people should be in jail for it.

    That said, we are getting fairly close to an understanding of what is actually going on in the climate, and it’s not clear that other than converting to nuclear power, and cutting the population to 1/6th, that we can (or should) do anything about it.

    NONE of the predictions, either in the 1970’s with global cooling, or in the 2000’s with AGW, or in the 2010’s with “Climate Change” have played out.

    Every single period in history, usually created by volcanic activity, has created much higher heat retention, which is rapidly corrected. We are nowhere close to it.

    Current variations in the climate are within normal ‘noise’, and the statistical analysis of the temperature readings follows the same errors of the statistical analysis of the stock market (shown by mandelbrot) and that this is just noise not signal.

    All evidence is that very little is going to happen and that all we need to do, if anything, is move to nuclear power, electric vehicles, and cut the population back to 1-3B.

    Worse, we are entering another cooling period. We have to because of the various perturbations of the orbit and axis. And the recent warming period is nearly over.

    I think everyone is largely attention seeking, and that as usually, the scientific community is seeking research dollars, the press attention, the state power, and the people who pay for it the truth.

    The truth is we are affecting the heat retention of the planet. And we have no freaking clue what is going to happen because of it – and we have no freaking clue how the planet will respond to it.

    But one thing is sure given the history of human thought: what’s being said is hyperbole.

    Follow Judith Curry’s web site which is the most accurate (scientific) analysis of the movement and its current status.

    Harrari is just another (((populist))) author selling abrahamic fantasy literature to the weak.

    STATE OF CLIMATE DATA

    If y’all can’t understand this report and how ‘moderate’ any change in the climate will be, then y’all are too ignorant and possibly too stupid to open your collective mouths on the subject.

    https://judithcurry.com/2018/10/11/climate-uncertainty-monster-whats-the-worst-case/


    Source date (UTC): 2018-10-27 09:49:00 UTC

  • I don’t have respect for ‘philosophers’

    (FB 1540566639 Timestamp) REMINDER: [H]onestly. I deal with history, law, economics, science, logic, mathematics and scientists. I don’t have any respect for ‘philosophers’ in general, and none at all for continentals, who I see as idealist versions of abrahamic/islamist supernaturalists employing sentimental sophisms rather than sentimental supernatural fictionalisms. Sophist, Pseudoscientific, and Supernatural Wisdom literature exists as a competitor to law and science by creating resistance movements against adaptation by enforced ignorance and conformity. I write in what I undrestand is the LAW, which means testimony (measurements) in metaphysics, psychology, social science, which means the end of philosophy as anything other than choice of preference and good FROM the findings of LAW (Science and Testimony). In other words, it is my intention to exterminate philosophy (from the public sphere) as a discipline with LAW just as we exterminated religious theology (from the public sphere) with Physical Science. So I write in law, science, and logic in the structure (outline) of aristotelian philosophy for the purpose of destroying the (continental) cancer of ‘philosophy’ that is nothing but a set of sophomoric and pseudoscientific and in some cases (Evola) occult, drivel preventing us from taking action to impose LAW upon those who would use the same techniques as philosophers and theologians and pseudoscientists, to return us to the Abrahamic Dark Ages of delusionary ignorance.

  • I don’t have respect for ‘philosophers’

    (FB 1540566639 Timestamp) REMINDER: [H]onestly. I deal with history, law, economics, science, logic, mathematics and scientists. I don’t have any respect for ‘philosophers’ in general, and none at all for continentals, who I see as idealist versions of abrahamic/islamist supernaturalists employing sentimental sophisms rather than sentimental supernatural fictionalisms. Sophist, Pseudoscientific, and Supernatural Wisdom literature exists as a competitor to law and science by creating resistance movements against adaptation by enforced ignorance and conformity. I write in what I undrestand is the LAW, which means testimony (measurements) in metaphysics, psychology, social science, which means the end of philosophy as anything other than choice of preference and good FROM the findings of LAW (Science and Testimony). In other words, it is my intention to exterminate philosophy (from the public sphere) as a discipline with LAW just as we exterminated religious theology (from the public sphere) with Physical Science. So I write in law, science, and logic in the structure (outline) of aristotelian philosophy for the purpose of destroying the (continental) cancer of ‘philosophy’ that is nothing but a set of sophomoric and pseudoscientific and in some cases (Evola) occult, drivel preventing us from taking action to impose LAW upon those who would use the same techniques as philosophers and theologians and pseudoscientists, to return us to the Abrahamic Dark Ages of delusionary ignorance.

  • REMINDER: Honestly. I deal with history, law, economics, science, logic, mathema

    REMINDER:

    Honestly. I deal with history, law, economics, science, logic, mathematics and scientists.

    I don’t have any respect for ‘philosophers’ in general, and none at all for continentals, who I see as idealist versions of abrahamic/islamist supernaturalists employing sentimental sophisms rather than sentimental supernatural fictionalisms.

    Sophist, Pseudoscientific, and Supernatural Wisdom literature exists as a competitor to law and science by creating resistance movements against adaptation by enforced ignorance and conformity.

    I write in what I undrestand is the LAW, which means testimony (measurements) in metaphysics, psychology, social science, which means the end of philosophy as anything other than choice of preference and good FROM the findings of LAW (Science and Testimony).

    In other words, it is my intention to exterminate philosophy (from the public sphere) as a discipline with LAW just as we exterminated religious theology (from the public sphere) with Physical Science.

    So I write in law, science, and logic in the structure (outline) of aristotelian philosophy for the purpose of destroying the (continental) cancer of ‘philosophy’ that is nothing but a set of sophomoric and pseudoscientific and in some cases (Evola) occult, drivel preventing us from taking action to impose LAW upon those who would use the same techniques as philosophers and theologians and pseudoscientists, to return us to the Abrahamic Dark Ages of delusionary ignorance.


    Source date (UTC): 2018-10-26 11:10:00 UTC

  • (d) the reason to write philosophy and theology is precisely to avoid math, logi

    (d) the reason to write philosophy and theology is precisely to avoid math, logic, science, economics, law, biography, and history. …


    Source date (UTC): 2018-10-25 22:20:42 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1055584967760187392

    Reply addressees: @PhilosophyCuck @MrKennan1948 @WorMartiN

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1055565599517167618


    IN REPLY TO:

    @Jonas_Ceika

    @curtdoolittle @MrKennan1948 @WorMartiN So are you saying that rigorously interpreting a text is by definition pilpul and therefore bad? How do you read philosophy then?

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1055565599517167618

  • (a) Is that what I am saying? And (b) Why would anyone read either theology or p

    (a) Is that what I am saying? And (b) Why would anyone read either theology or philosophy in the age of math, logic, sciences, economics, law, history, and literature – each of which is less vulnerable to fraud and confirmation bias, than sophism (philosophy) and magic(theology)?


    Source date (UTC): 2018-10-25 22:16:22 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1055583878067482624

    Reply addressees: @PhilosophyCuck @MrKennan1948 @WorMartiN

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1055565599517167618


    IN REPLY TO:

    @Jonas_Ceika

    @curtdoolittle @MrKennan1948 @WorMartiN So are you saying that rigorously interpreting a text is by definition pilpul and therefore bad? How do you read philosophy then?

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1055565599517167618

  • Cont. 5) “Wisdom Lit” (fairy tales, parables, myths, novels) may state the human

    Cont. 5) “Wisdom Lit” (fairy tales, parables, myths, novels) may state the human experience in a manner that persists over time into new circumstances. Science does the opposite: It searches for constant relations that are invariant over time independent of our experience.


    Source date (UTC): 2018-10-25 21:15:53 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1055568654362906624

    Reply addressees: @PhilosophyCuck @MrKennan1948 @WorMartiN

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1055556675585875968


    IN REPLY TO:

    @Jonas_Ceika

    @MrKennan1948 @curtdoolittle @WorMartiN The language is very familiar to me. What confuses me is the fact that it’s completely detached from any of my criticisms on the topic.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1055556675585875968

  • 19) And like I said, if you studied Physics, Genetic and Cultural Differences, P

    19) And like I said, if you studied Physics, Genetic and Cultural Differences, Political Economy, and Law (the complete scientific method), then you would understand such things – instead of reading Sophomoric Political Fantasy Fiction.


    Source date (UTC): 2018-10-25 13:42:46 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1055454624428277761

    Reply addressees: @PhilosophyCuck @WorMartiN

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1055224404764999680


    IN REPLY TO:

    @Jonas_Ceika

    @curtdoolittle @WorMartiN You also end by saying one should study law, not literature. First off, I don’t study literature. Secondly, how is that an argument? And how is if Marx is liable for murder at all relevant to my points? I’m genuinely confused.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1055224404764999680

  • 14) Because it was this group strategy (today called “OODA Loops” in military, a

    14) Because it was this group strategy (today called “OODA Loops” in military, and “innovation” in economics, technology, and science, that allowed western civ in the ancient and modern worlds, to drag mankind kicking and screaming out of ignorance, poverty, labor, and suffering.


    Source date (UTC): 2018-10-25 13:34:08 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1055452451107692545

    Reply addressees: @PhilosophyCuck @WorMartiN

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1055224404764999680


    IN REPLY TO:

    @Jonas_Ceika

    @curtdoolittle @WorMartiN You also end by saying one should study law, not literature. First off, I don’t study literature. Secondly, how is that an argument? And how is if Marx is liable for murder at all relevant to my points? I’m genuinely confused.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1055224404764999680

  • 7) And that under Falsificationism (Survival) from tests of coherence, consisten

    7) And that under Falsificationism (Survival) from tests of coherence, consistency, correspondence, existential possibility, rationality, reciprocity, limits and completeness (what we test in court) such Frauds (Lies to cover Thefts) are exposed. Leaving only truth candidates.


    Source date (UTC): 2018-10-25 13:18:20 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1055448476576825345

    Reply addressees: @PhilosophyCuck @WorMartiN

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1055224404764999680


    IN REPLY TO:

    @Jonas_Ceika

    @curtdoolittle @WorMartiN You also end by saying one should study law, not literature. First off, I don’t study literature. Secondly, how is that an argument? And how is if Marx is liable for murder at all relevant to my points? I’m genuinely confused.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1055224404764999680