They Argue that Many > 자유게시판

I can definitely see the pondering behind this e https://jerkplanet.org/ book. Stan Friedman's speciality is debunking the debunkers. His lectures and his books take sloppy negativism to task, and switch many armchair sceptics into a laughing stock. "Science Was Wrong" takes that basic thrust a step additional.

Throughout the history of science there have been 'impossibilists' who've denounced the latest discovery or technical innovation as rubbish, often as a knee-jerk reaction. In fact, scepticism is a part of the philosophy of science - new ideas are scrutinised by friends rigorously, and reproducible methodologies are important to good science. This guide has no drawback with that. The problem is the more human aspect to peer assessment. Egos, vested pursuits, politics, ethical and religious objections, and evasion of duty are all key parts to understanding why science can go mistaken.

The authors describe in detail many nicely-documented events in historical past when outstanding scientific work has been shot down from the sidelines by individuals who actually ought to have identified better. They argue that many, many lives have been misplaced consequently.

For example, the invention of the jet engine, which was fist constructed in the city I reside in (Gloucester, England), might need helped Britain see off the Nazis earlier on through the second world battle if Frank Whittle's invention had solely been taken significantly (pp22-7). Similarly, Goddard's early work in rocketry was debunked publicly by the new York Times, which held off 49 years earlier than apologising (p30). The inventor died unheralded, his work eclipsed by the German rocket scientists delivered to America after the struggle. Inventors usually need a substantial amount of tenacity, as well as imaginative and prescient, to beat the scepticism and ridicule that may be piled upon them from all kinds of directions.

The authors argue that "technological progress comes from doing issues otherwise in an unpredictable manner" (p40). This notion seems to be anathema to many scientists whose pondering is commonly extra linear and rigidly structured. Often the training of pure scientists sceptical of technological innovation is solely inappropriate - they aren't exposed sufficiently to the world of military research, and their experience past the slender confines of their own speciality is insufficient to the duty of judging the deserves of the case. More often, but not at all times, debunkers are merely lazy:

"It is certainly not scientific to do one's analysis by proclamation relatively than investigation." (p40)

There are some surprises within the lengthy checklist of victims of bogus scepticism. Immanuel Velikovsky might have had some unusual ideas in regards to the origins of the planet Venus, but he was proper about its floor temperature, as effectively as the emission of radio waves from Jupiter (p45) A extra fashionable instance is the ridicule heaped upon chilly fusion. The authors argue convincingly that outcomes from new analysis, carried out largely away from the general public's gaze, is displaying nice promise (Ch5). A breakthrough would have far-reaching penalties for your entire power sector. Which, in itself, may be the problem.

Probably the most powerful writing within the guide was within the part dedicated to debunked medical breakthroughs. I found the section about Edward Jenner's conquest of Smallpox wonderful (he was one other native boy from around here, and the cartoon above options some wonderful examples of Gloucestershire folk: I think I recognise just a few! As an apart to the authors, the Isle of Purbeck, where Jenner once lived for a while, is just not actually an island (p102). It is a district of Dorset the place, coincidentally, I often take my household on holiday).

Another good chapter discussed the intransigence and arrogance of the medical establishment as early theories of bacterial infections emerged. That medical doctors often do not wash their hands will got here as no surprise to many of us in the well being sector, even now.

The writing turns into fairly political in places, especially when describing the American interest in Eugenics in the primary half of the 20th century. I've seen one Amazon review which did not like the authors' stance on this - a comment which I find scary, frankly. The American, and other Western nations', flirtation with such authoritarian ideologies was actually a source of shame, but at the least America drew again from the brink. The terrifying and tragic consequences of a authorities doctrine of Eugenics in Nazi Germany have been plain for all to see. Although derived from Darwinism in a warped kind of approach, Eugenics itself was not a scientifically valid concept in any respect.

The chapters highlighting corporate negligence and industrial pollution have been additionally powerful, and disturbing. Controversy rages in the chapters on Global Warming, and the environmental considerations about toxic methyl mercury pollution from chemical industries and coal-fired energy stations. An inconsistency in the ebook emerges here when the authors contemplate what, if anything, to do concerning the power sector's addiction to cheap coal (evaluate p150 and p158).

The last section of the book seems on the scientific institution's negativity in direction of fringe research areas, resembling psi phenomena and UFOs. Having just learn in regards to the historic context of grossly unfair - and ultimately incorrect - scepticism, one can admire how many modern sceptics are falling into the identical traps:

"Today's skilled "skeptics" typically adhere to an nearly theistic belief in "science", marked by cynicism and the manipulation of knowledge to fit their private beliefs. Many plead for scientific scrutiny however are often, in actuality, scientifically naive writers. Mainstream scientists, the media, and most of the people are sometimes deceived by the skeptics' misinformation." (p167)

These are sturdy claims indeed, but the authors do an excellent job of substantiating them. Regrettably, a lot of the fabric on this section relies upon work previously printed by the same writers, and it feels like a re-packaging of their material. But for a lot of not already acquainted with the scientific proof for psychic phenomena, UFOs and alien abductions there is way right here to ponder upon.