The best of times the worst of times. Our time is the time of extreme mental illness. It’s what we’ve turned to. The Byrds I think left that one out.
Science itself turned. Science now is an absurd pretense intended to create a respectable appearance. A charade.
I had the misfortune of talking with a “scientist” in a pub recently. Why do I ever talk to anyone anymore?
A precisely anti-science masquerade mask of a scientist, believing itself to be one.
With a handful of exceptions that’s what they all are these days.
It’s an extreme form of mental illness and the entire civilization is modeled on this now. This is our time:
Deranged and rigid.
We have no ideas anymore.
We have IDS instead.
Incurious Dullards and Sycophants
I asked the masquerade mask in the pub about his field. He’s in biochemistry with some relation to Alzheimers research. Ah, well, so I asked him about the Alzheimer’s thing that’s all over the popular press, about the neck microsurgery out of China that increases protein drainage out of the brain through the lymph system.
https://www.ad-lva.com/surgery-of-ad-disease
He dismissed it out of hand as “not science”.
How do you know?
Because it’s in Newsweek.
So you haven’t looked into it.
There are tens of thousands of scientists all over the world so, if it were real it would be taken seriously, there would be collaboration, scrutiny, and so on. And it’s not, so, no need for me to look into it.
Interesting thought. I would say that if I talked with 10,000 scientists they’d all have the same idea. What do you think?
Yeah.
Well, if that’s true, then what would motivate any single one of them to look into it?
That is not a sensible question according to the masquerade mask of a scientist believing itself to be one. Nope. Instead the mask replies with an onslaught of insults.
What else do you not believe in, it asked.
What? Clarify your question.
Do you not believe in the moon landing?
What’s that got to do with what I asked you?
Do you not even know what statistical consensus means!?
You’re not answering my question.
I did answer your question. Three times.
No I don’t think you did. I’ll rephrase it: Given that pretty much every scientist today with few exceptions would say what you said, that it’s not science, that you believe without evidence that it’s been scrutinized and found wanting, that you have no conceivable interest in looking into it, that you are a walking monument to ideological rigidity, that you’re incurious, a dullard in other words, and a sycophant for corporate straight jacketing, then what exactly is your excuse for yourself and why do you taint the word science with your devotion to an attitude that is with the greatest possible precision, anti-science?
This guy, and all the other midwits like him are better suited as bureaucrats, or prison guards. Wherever there’s pay for following orders.
They’re not adequate for science.
No scientist whose name holds in the collective memory, surviving in the history of science, held ideas so zealous in the strangulation of thought itself.
On the difference:
The masquerade mask unloaded several magazines of smear ammo and condescension before I stood up with a “man that’s fucked up” and lobbed a “fuhk you” on my way out.
We’ve all seen it, a million times in media. It’s sad though, and more pathetic seeing someone spout it in person. There’s a special case of it though and the mask deployed it. It’s the narrative adjustment trotted out by NIAID along the way, that takes the form, superficially, of a concession to critics:
Scientists need to do a better job communicating science. (so people understand it better)
Pseudo-scientists (masks) “accept that criticism”.
They’re aware, very well aware, that to them it’s an ego-inflating back-handed compliment, a false concession that’s just more condescension (making self feel, or claim to feel, special).
This is transparently obvious to everyone while the masquerade masks believe it transparent only to themselves. They miss everything entirely, geniuses that they are:
We all see that “we need to communicate science better” is a sop designed for them, for masks, not for critics, to tuck in their egos under comfy blankets. They’re infantile. This is more than enough to keep them from wandering off the reservation, not that they’re even equipped to do so anyway.
This is low level, Marianas Trench depth pathetic. How little it takes to keep them corralled, soft pillowing their Humpty Dumpty egos. They’re intellectually inadequate and they know it; keeping that hidden is top in their motivation hierarchy.
So they’ll lap up and lip smack any weak sauce thrown their way like it’s the Mole Poblano queen of all sauces. They’ll ride any narrative that gets them back in the saddle of their high horse three-legged ass. They’ll take anything to remain smug.
That’s the purpose of the slogan: assuaging masked insecurities, not elevating science, or science education.
Another thing everyone but masks see is that, no, we’re not too dumb to understand science. We don’t need it explained to us like we’re 5.
What we see, that you don’t, is that science has turned 100% into a shit hole of corruption. We all see that because it’s obvious as a fire-eating, trumpets-blaring, red carpet un-rolling, elephants-stomping, sword swallowing, pin-juggling circus marching through the door past us mobile mesmerized through the house and out the back door.
We all see that.
Former editors of tier 1 science journals see it and say so publicly.
There are two exceptions, exceptional types who don’t see it:
masquerade masks masquerading as scientists
the sad fraction of the population whose brain stem melted from 25 years of war-grade psychological manipulation.