It’s worth noting that we haven’t established that there are even fossil bacteria on Mars. But we are starting to hear more than ever that there are intelligent aliens out there, most recently from Ars Technica and Scientific American. Fundamentally, we have found nothing since the Sixties that truly suggests extraterrestrial civilizations. Nothing. If they want to keep looking, fine. Nobody’s stopping them. But spare us the dramatics.
Media
Veteran journalist leaves major paper before anyone cancels her
She might be pointing a way forward, to fight back against Cancel Culture.
Multiverse physicist Max Tegmark switches gears; seeks AI to combat “news bias”
Readers may recall him from the four levels of multiverse he advocated in Scientific American in 2003. But forget that. He now thinks there is too much bias in American media and he is working on an AI program to combat it
ID folk know a fair bit about how Cancel Culture works
As more and more normal people are Canceled for doing normal things, it will become progressively clearer that the nasties of Cancel Culture are at direct odds with the welfare of any normal enterprise they attach themselves to, whether it is a newspaper or a science. Finally, one must choose between catering to them and tending to the welfare of the enterprise.
At American Council on Science and Health: Political Partisanship is a Public Health Scourge
The situation poses a threat to science itself. For example, politicians act as though COVID-19 restrictions only matter for some people, not others.
Jonathan McLatchie has a new website
Here: Featuring articles like “The secular vs. sacred distinction: Is it valid? I believe the distinction between the secular and the sacred to be a valid one, although they do to an extent overlap and it is a mistake to draw a sharp dichotomy between the two spheres. Unfortunately, our culture and even the church Read More…
Wikipedia co-founder laments loss of objectivity again
It’s not just that Wikipedia is anti-ID but the site seems to be dominated by stupid yay-hoos who can’t even disagree intelligently. One outcome is that, on many issues, one doesn’t get a good sense of what the live, interesting issues really are.
An eye-opening science-related COVID roundup
Reliance on expertise can, depending on the circumstances, be a form of superstition. And, in short, the numbers solemnly announced by the suits on TV are often just a crock. And none of this is doing the reputation of science any good.
David Klinghoffer: Evolutionary thinking in a “state of decadence”
He quotes from a post by paleontologist Gunter Bechly on everyone’s favorite cuddly pet, prehistoric scorpions.
Sabine Hossenfelder makes it to Slashdot
Hossenfelder: What we have here in the foundation of physics is a plain failure of the scientific method. All these wrong predictions should have taught physicists that just because they can write down equations for something does not mean this math is a scientifically promising hypothesis.
New Scientist tries to undermine Cambrian explosion
The Ediacaran creatures are fascinating predecessors to be sure. They will likely turn out to be explosions of life, just like the Cambrian, but often not clearly related to it.
Science journalist tells Steven Pinker, yes, we ARE living in a post-truth society
Evolutionary psychologist Steven Pinker is rebuked for the view he represents in a recent essay for Skeptic, “Why We Are Not Living in a Post Truth Era”
The science-based arguments against Copernicus and Galileo
Pop science writing typically misleads us by portraying the conflict as if the rightness of the Copernican universe were self-evident. For sure not at the time.
At the Atlantic: Textbook evolution story is said to be WRONG
Hadn’t the Darwin lobby better invade and frogmarch all these little East Coast snots back into line? They must never talk in such a way as to imply that Darwinism could be wrong about anything.
PragerU’s new vid explains science-based doubts about evolution
“In November 2016, I attended a conference in London attended by some of the world’s leading evolutionary biologists. The purpose? To address growing doubts about the modern version of Darwin’s theory,”