To judge from the flow of verbiage, it spells little good for the sciences. One rather inclines, in part, to Steven Weinberg’s succinct view,given last: Alas, it was too late. I may be just out of the loop, but it seems to me now that for scientists to argue against constructivism is beating a dead […]
But the Woke war on science, now that IS real.
Maybe the main thing to see here is that lots of people would love to falsify or tame quantum mechanics, the way they would like to falsify the Big Bang or fine-tuning and it won’t be their fault for lack of trying.
With respect to the simulation multiverse: Why could there not be countless, helplessly infinite, simulations of the simulations as well?
Science Uprising calls out indoctrination by people such as Richard Dawkins and Neil deGrasse Tyson.
Trust science? No. Trust but verify.
One way of looking at it: If you believe vaguely that “there is something out there,” you needn’t do anything about it. You needn’t even avoid superstition. You can even be part of a war on science in good faith.
She also reveals that a two-page survey was handed out, asking a number of none-o’-yer-business questions on behalf of “Audience Research & Analysis, an organization that helps government agencies and cultural agencies to “move forward with decision research.”
They are trying to interpret a world they don’t understand. They cling to Evolution (Darwinism) as TRUTH! because someone told them so. They are often not smart enough to see that any true story would be much more complex. Any interesting story is more complex too.
Epstein:The result: The experts were, by and large, horrific forecasters.
You’d never guess from his career that thinking the universe shows evidence of design would ruin science. How did he escape Darwin’s thugs?
Today, if we are surrounded by dangerous flimflam, we may also be surrounded by blowhards puffing for “science” on its behalf.
Of course, the price of cereal matters more to people on a limited budget than claims about polar bears, which they themselves never see outside a zoo. Most people in the world would not know that polar bears exist if no one told them so but they would know if food was getting scarce and cannot easily be fooled on the point. Good for him for understanding that.
Could legacy science media actually afford to get it right? Could they afford a serious discussion?
Sabine Hossenfelder’s view: Realism is a philosophy. It’s a belief system, and science does not tell you whether it is correct.