• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

Belief vs Science

OP
Wombat

Wombat

Master Contributor
Joined
Nov 5, 2017
Messages
6,722
Likes
6,459
Location
Australia
I am not denying climate change, I am saying that there are some questionable responses to it and that listening to those who understand the merit or otherwise of these potential responses is just as important as listening to climate scientists.

Opinions need to be validly verifiable. Most contrarian ones are selective sample limited compared to the overall picture.
 

digicidal

Major Contributor
Joined
Jul 6, 2019
Messages
1,981
Likes
4,838
Location
Sin City, NV
If only it weren't for people... then I could have my cake and eat it too. :D Honestly the only solutions that are even remotely likely to be implemented (I don't buy a futurist-utopian ideal any more than a miraculous redemption) are ones I'll be glad I won't be alive to participate in... or as I would call it "be subjected to". As long as any solution is implemented as one for everyone else - with exclusions for those actually backing the solution (as we've seen with privacy, diplomacy, health care, taxation, etc.) there is not much chance for consensus. And that would be the case even if there was universal acceptance of the underlying data to begin with - which there isn't at this point.

Realistically I think there are options which could be marketed successfully to the general public... but again, they likely won't see the light of day until all of the profits have been fully wrung from the less efficient versions we currently have. The problem is indeed present in the elites and in political opportunists... but it's equally present in all of us as individuals as well. Reminds me of one of my favorite bits in Futurama:

 

Tks

Major Contributor
Joined
Apr 1, 2019
Messages
3,221
Likes
5,494
Even if you can refrain from driving, and even if you can reduce your power consumption as much as possible, the major polluters are industry, production and shipping, and the solutions need to come from political action.

Unfortunately, the majority of politicians are more concerned about staying in power and kowtowing to those with disproportionate wealth, not ordinary people.

I'd like to just add to this well presented post, that all of these issues (which people trace back to politicians and abhorrent laws) aren't actually at that root.

The root of all of this is culture. Laws never substantively change in spite of, or without a parallel to culture. Any politician that successfully gets a law passed contrarian to the values of the society (or the majority of the constituency in that society's tolerance level) usually has that law dismantled soon enough, if they themselves as the politician isn't dismantled. As long as something is "tolerable" that also counts as "acceptance" in culture.

Take any social justice campaign in the last two centuries for example, and I'd be glad to see which one had any positive outcome that wasn't FIRST the result of a culture societal acceptance as it's first step. (I can't find any). So for instance when people in the US wonder why so many folks are ruthless here, and so many politicians that "worship the dollar". You MUST look back on the values we as such have here. All the aspects of American culture of individualism, of pursuit of prosperity without impediment, of the value people place on how much you own... ALL of that is what contributes to creating a plane where all the sorts of types of despicable people can foster, and the laws that propel them.

Though I will somewhat disagree with this post as it excuses something call a 'futility fallacy'. Which in this case is basically "oh well if Chevrolet can keep polluting the planet while they enjoy being rich, I'm not going to waste my time recycling as one individual and still never be as prosperous as any of their executives that are laughing to the bank. There's no way any of my efforts matter". This is a highly defeatist and the most dangerous stance anyone could have with respect to addressing problems affecting sizable populations and issues. Some people will carry this sort of logical fallacy with them and spread it to others in the worst case: "Yeah dude, don't bother recycling, no point, we won't be changing shit ever". And that's when you've totally lost.

If any semblance of respect for the well-being of the planet, and others exists within you. You simply do the best you can. There is solace and a victory to be had knowing you're at least not a part of the waves of drones that are a part of a problem very easy to be dragged into.

If anyone has ever been to Holland, or perhaps some of the Nordic nations. Just take a look at how people act in a collective manner, or where their values are placed. It's a spitting image of their laws, and it shows with their overall higher standard of living for a sizable portion of the population that live more as a group, rather than the sorts of people I see here in NYC that you would almost think are enemies forced to live within walking distance of one another. Those folks in those other countries live in virutally polar opposite to what we consider individualistic or independent culture.
 
OP
Wombat

Wombat

Master Contributor
Joined
Nov 5, 2017
Messages
6,722
Likes
6,459
Location
Australia
The general scientific view is quite overwhelming. If one can't disagree at the same level then why bother?

Same for audio science.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tks

JJB70

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Aug 17, 2018
Messages
2,905
Likes
6,148
Location
Singapore
Opinions need to be validly verifiable. Most contrarian ones are selective sample limited compared to the overall picture.

I'm not talking about "opinions", I'm talking about scientific and technical argument where certain positions are not supported by evidence or data. People can't have it both ways, you can't demand that we listen to scientists when they support what you want then dismiss them when they disagree. Blumlein 88 pointed out that bio-ethanol is not the panacea it seems, there has been a lively debate about the climate benefits and societal issues around bio-fuels for many years (the arguments haven't really changed that much). I can point to similar issues around some of the stuff out there about Black Carbon is demonstrably not supported by emission measurement. And some of the BAU scenarios are based on economic growth forecasts not supported by any other forecasts. None of this is climate denial, it is pointing out that politicising a scientific debate or cherry picking which data to seize upon or condemn is unacceptable from either direction.
 

Tks

Major Contributor
Joined
Apr 1, 2019
Messages
3,221
Likes
5,494
If only it weren't for people... then I could have my cake and eat it too. :D Honestly the only solutions that are even remotely likely to be implemented (I don't buy a futurist-utopian ideal any more than a miraculous redemption) are ones I'll be glad I won't be alive to participate in... or as I would call it "be subjected to". As long as any solution is implemented as one for everyone else - with exclusions for those actually backing the solution (as we've seen with privacy, diplomacy, health care, taxation, etc.) there is not much chance for consensus. And that would be the case even if there was universal acceptance of the underlying data to begin with - which there isn't at this point.

Realistically I think there are options which could be marketed successfully to the general public... but again, they likely won't see the light of day until all of the profits have been fully wrung from the less efficient versions we currently have. The problem is indeed present in the elites and in political opportunists... but it's equally present in all of us as individuals as well. Reminds me of one of my favorite bits in Futurama:


And that would be the case even if there was universal acceptance of the underlying data to begin with - which there isn't at this point.

There is a very good reason and solution for that. We can start with addressing education, and virtually a complete lack of teaching people critical/rational/logical thinking until you get to college and then ONLY when you opt into a certain field, does it begin to play a role. But here in the US, college is becoming increasingly unaffordable, and the results show.

People think people in the ancient past (like Egyptians, or Romans that built amazing structures) were either working with aliens, or just a few handful of geniuses. When in fact there was actual and prototypical science being practiced. In the Roman empire, there was a classroom subject called "Rhetoric". Now you might be thinking wtf? Why would they teach people how to employ rhetoric? For the same reason you open source a piece of code, it allows the subjects to all be aware of the potential pitfalls and work on immunizing themselves from such. So someone like Trump for example, would never be able to speak the sort of bullshit he does and anyone take him serious (or any politician for that matter, as they're all versed with the greatest forms of literary manipulation tactics, backed by advisors that operated and passed down generations of psychological and such other techniques about how to be successful leaders who control their people).

Imagine teaching from elementary school today "History on Ways to Bullshit People" or "Primer on How to Spot Charlatans" (sans vulgarity). You'd suddenly have a lot less people influenced by the scruples of advertising agencies, or political campaigns.

Imagine a world where AudioQuest's claims could only appeal to people who've not graduated elementary school?

I think that would be be a GREAT start to being qualified in an attempt at solving problems in the world (as opposed to today where most of the talent is housed in a very select few, who themselves are gobbled up by forces and work for the highest paying bidder because everything seems like a fight for survival).
 
OP
Wombat

Wombat

Master Contributor
Joined
Nov 5, 2017
Messages
6,722
Likes
6,459
Location
Australia
I'm not talking about "opinions", I'm talking about scientific and technical argument where certain positions are not supported by evidence or data. People can't have it both ways, you can't demand that we listen to scientists when they support what you want then dismiss them when they disagree. Blumlein 88 pointed out that bio-ethanol is not the panacea it seems, there has been a lively debate about the climate benefits and societal issues around bio-fuels for many years (the arguments haven't really changed that much). I can point to similar issues around some of the stuff out there about Black Carbon is demonstrably not supported by emission measurement. And some of the BAU scenarios are based on economic growth forecasts not supported by any other forecasts. None of this is climate denial, it is pointing out that politicising a scientific debate or cherry picking which data to seize upon or condemn is unacceptable from either direction.

Cherry picking is addressed in the scientific work. You are qualified beyond a personal opinion preference re this science??
 

JJB70

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Aug 17, 2018
Messages
2,905
Likes
6,148
Location
Singapore
Cherry picking is addressed in the scientific work. You are qualified beyond a personal opinion preference re this science??

Yes.
 

mansr

Major Contributor
Joined
Oct 5, 2018
Messages
4,685
Likes
10,700
Location
Hampshire
The reason Evolutionary Biology is taught is because it is the best explanation that is congruent with both biological and geological data out there. It's biggest problem is that it minimizes the role of religion (i.e. God) in the start of life.
Problem? I call it a strength.
 

Killingbeans

Major Contributor
Joined
Oct 23, 2018
Messages
4,089
Likes
7,547
Location
Bjerringbro, Denmark.
Humans gonna human.

One end of the spectrum tries to bury the problems with "impartial" think tanks, and the other end thinks they can be solved with conceptual art.
 

Snarfie

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Apr 30, 2018
Messages
1,169
Likes
926
Location
Netherlands
If we life in a holografic univers we all are right.:cool:o_O
 

KozmoNaut

Active Member
Joined
Sep 28, 2019
Messages
299
Likes
633
'
If any semblance of respect for the well-being of the planet, and others exists within you. You simply do the best you can. There is solace and a victory to be had knowing you're at least not a part of the waves of drones that are a part of a problem very easy to be dragged into.

I absolutely advocate for doing what you can on a personal level. Even better if you can do it on a community level.

We just have to realize that this alone is not enough to fully mitigate the issue of anthropogenic climate change, but it can be a catalyst for cultural and political change.
 

JJB70

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Aug 17, 2018
Messages
2,905
Likes
6,148
Location
Singapore
Ok. Please elaborate, if you will. :)

My day job is emissions policy, both local air quality matters such as NOx, SOx and PM and also GHGs. I spent last week at the International Maritime Organization ISWG-GHG6 and drafted one of the submissions. I think I'll be required to attend COP25 in Madrid (I'm annoyed because I rather fancied visiting Chile). When I did my Master's I studied combustion thermodynamics and emissions and have written several papers and articles on emissions abatement. Prior to my current role I was the global technical authority for energy conversion and emissions for one of the worlds principal classification societies and prior to that I was a strategic development engineer in the renewable energy unit of one of the major electricity companies where I was in origination of renewable electricity generating projects before being temporarily assigned to carbon capture and storage for a proposed new coal plant. I was also rapporteur of a European Commission expert group (their term, not mine) on emissions abatement.

My job means I have to read all of the submissions on emissions and GHGs at IMO as well as monitoring COP documents and also keeping abreast of technical papers etc. So I'm certainly no climate scientist, but I have some understanding of emissions and emissions abatement, alternative fuels etc.
 

Snarfie

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Apr 30, 2018
Messages
1,169
Likes
926
Location
Netherlands
My day job is emissions policy, both local air quality matters such as NOx, SOx and PM and also GHGs. I spent last week at the International Maritime Organization ISWG-GHG6 and drafted one of the submissions. I think I'll be required to attend COP25 in Madrid (I'm annoyed because I rather fancied visiting Chile). When I did my Master's I studied combustion thermodynamics and emissions and have written several papers and articles on emissions abatement. Prior to my current role I was the global technical authority for energy conversion and emissions for one of the worlds principal classification societies and prior to that I was a strategic development engineer in the renewable energy unit of one of the major electricity companies where I was in origination of renewable electricity generating projects before being temporarily assigned to carbon capture and storage for a proposed new coal plant. I was also rapporteur of a European Commission expert group (their term, not mine) on emissions abatement.

My job means I have to read all of the submissions on emissions and GHGs at IMO as well as monitoring COP documents and also keeping abreast of technical papers etc. So I'm certainly no climate scientist, but I have some understanding of emissions and emissions abatement, alternative fuels etc.
Im qurius about your opinion regarding SunCell (or Brilliantlight power). They (Dr. mills) have probably the technical solution regarding generating Energy/electricity in abundance basicly for free. I'm following them for around 15 years but see them more as a hoax till now. I found his findings regarding his so called Hydrino (by him explaind as darkmatter) interesting. By changing the orbit of electrons in a lower orbit around the nucleus of a hydrogen atom (so called lower-energy state) he is generating enourmes amount of light (instead of heat) that he can convert by polyvoltic/solar panels to electricity. The known institutes like MIT and others don't want to touch it. https://brilliantlightpower.com/suncell/
 
Last edited:

scott wurcer

Major Contributor
Audio Luminary
Technical Expert
Joined
Apr 24, 2019
Messages
1,501
Likes
2,821
Imagine a world where AudioQuest's claims could only appeal to people who've not graduated elementary school?

Be nicer to kids, my first WTF moment was at 7yr. old when a friend down the street said he figured out how a periscope worked, "Your eyesight goes out and bounces back through the mirrors."

My favorite moment had nothing to do with science. A friend had two older brothers (circa 1959) who were early beatniks, he said they were non-conformists because they all dressed in black.
 

digicidal

Major Contributor
Joined
Jul 6, 2019
Messages
1,981
Likes
4,838
Location
Sin City, NV
There is a very good reason and solution for that. We can start with addressing education, and virtually a complete lack of teaching people critical/rational/logical thinking until you get to college and then ONLY when you opt into a certain field, does it begin to play a role. But here in the US, college is becoming increasingly unaffordable, and the results show.

Imagine teaching from elementary school today "History on Ways to Bullshit People" or "Primer on How to Spot Charlatans" (sans vulgarity). You'd suddenly have a lot less people influenced by the scruples of advertising agencies, or political campaigns.

Imagine a world where AudioQuest's claims could only appeal to people who've not graduated elementary school?

I think that would be be a GREAT start to being qualified in an attempt at solving problems in the world (as opposed to today where most of the talent is housed in a very select few, who themselves are gobbled up by forces and work for the highest paying bidder because everything seems like a fight for survival).

There's a couple of preliminary hurdles you're going to have to clear - at least in my unfortunate experience... the teachers and professors (from elementary through graduate programs) - are no more, and in some cases even less, capable of sorting fact from fiction than the general public. Sure this is much less common in the pure sciences... but not everyone has the desire or need for such education either. After all, one of the top aspirations of the current generation is to be an "Online Influencer". I understand that desire... but I'm not seeing STEM jobs as a fall-back for most of those people.

I'd say the primary problem with education here isn't actually the cost of it (although that is a definite problem)... but the fact that there is essentially no review and/or promotion of competence on the part of the educators themselves. Same as it is with almost any public employee (I deal with them for a living) there is not only a lack of accountability - there's an active process to promote incompetence. Have an employee that's stealing? Constant infighting? Absenteeism? Well, you can't fire them - so you recommend them for promotion into a different department... problem solved! :facepalm:

Throw in some policies which stipulate hiring based on some non-performant metric (i.e. race, gender, handicaps, prior public office, education level)... basically anything other than actual experience... and you've got a great system for producing AudioQuest customers as you would put it. ;)
 

Tks

Major Contributor
Joined
Apr 1, 2019
Messages
3,221
Likes
5,494
There's a couple of preliminary hurdles you're going to have to clear - at least in my unfortunate experience... the teachers and professors (from elementary through graduate programs) - are no more, and in some cases even less, capable of sorting fact from fiction than the general public. Sure this is much less common in the pure sciences... but not everyone has the desire or need for such education either. After all, one of the top aspirations of the current generation is to be an "Online Influencer". I understand that desire... but I'm not seeing STEM jobs as a fall-back for most of those people.

I'd say the primary problem with education here isn't actually the cost of it (although that is a definite problem)... but the fact that there is essentially no review and/or promotion of competence on the part of the educators themselves. Same as it is with almost any public employee (I deal with them for a living) there is not only a lack of accountability - there's an active process to promote incompetence. Have an employee that's stealing? Constant infighting? Absenteeism? Well, you can't fire them - so you recommend them for promotion into a different department... problem solved! :facepalm:

Throw in some policies which stipulate hiring based on some non-performant metric (i.e. race, gender, handicaps, prior public office, education level)... basically anything other than actual experience... and you've got a great system for producing AudioQuest customers as you would put it. ;)

It goes back to my prior sentiments about culture. It's at the root of all the realities we now have. The value placed on what people aspire to be, and achieve. The extreme tendency to value money and social presence (influence). All these aspects are, is factors that comprise the individualistic culture. It's common in fledgling civilizations or nations, or ones plagued with massive inequity among the social stratus.

When I mentioned starting with solving education, I didn't imply that education was solvable because it's the easiest, or that it's somehow easier because it's outside the realm of influence of the social apparatus of society. Even in high education... For instance in America, in virtually all economic courses, you'd be hard pressed to find any much learning material outside the scope of familiarization that entertains any sort of economic experimentation outside of capitalism. Socialism is spoken of in passing, and it's failures highlighted. The economic theory of Adam Smith and modern day proponents like Alan Greenspan have massive influence of the teaching curriculum.

There is no resource based economic theory, nothing of localized economic adaptation and implementation to suit various sectors of the country. Everything is a one-size-fits-all approach. Which is quite funny because regardless of socialism, communism, capitalism, whatever existing forms of economies are in practice today are ALL complete failures with current realities and requirements for stability. Why? Because every single one relies on cyclical consumption, and perpetual growth. There's just one problem with a system like that - it's completely contrary to the laws of physics.. Unlimited economic growth on a finite planet is a contradiction in terms, and why all current forms of government and economic theory fail spectacularly in the present day (and it shows). Ask any economist how this issue can be rectified, and see PhD's stumble with giving direct answers that aren't a convoluted mess.

So yes, I agree, performance based metrics for educators need to be a thing, and all that good stuff, with enough leeway not to be cancerous in the employment process (no point in being MEGA stringent if we lived in a society already well off, but when we're semi-fucked as we are now, the requirements assuredly need a belt tightening).

The problem I see mostly is the fact that we in America were doing better in the recent past (late fifties, to mid seventies approximately). The fact we can't at LEAST maintain that sort of society for more than a decade (or two at most) is telling of our inadequacies. If we can't solve the education issue, we have almost no hope at that point.

The most pathetic part being we have technology that people in that age never dreamed of, so our capability potential of getting things done is far easier than doing it in the past when things were always logistically slower to get done. Yet we're still failing.
 

digicidal

Major Contributor
Joined
Jul 6, 2019
Messages
1,981
Likes
4,838
Location
Sin City, NV
Well, with perspective to nearly every other civilization in history - and certainly in comparison to our European "parents" - this country is barely out of it's infancy. Like most children, we are not lacking in energy and creativity... but also like children - we are seriously lacking in both discipline and life experience... which leads to some catastrophic mistakes. Especially if you eschew any form of advice or instruction from your "elders". :rolleyes:
 

Tks

Major Contributor
Joined
Apr 1, 2019
Messages
3,221
Likes
5,494
Well, with perspective to nearly every other civilization in history - and certainly in comparison to our European "parents" - this country is barely out of it's infancy. Like most children, we are not lacking in energy and creativity... but also like children - we are seriously lacking in both discipline and life experience... which leads to some catastrophic mistakes. Especially if you eschew any form of advice or instruction from your "elders". :rolleyes:

I'd prefer eschewing all advice, regardless of source, if it doesn't further well-being and understanding. Elders or not. And tbh elders aren't immune to holding ridiculous ideas. Take a look at some older audiophiles, or older hardline nationalist conservatives, or older religious folks.

I say take the best advice from everyone, and toss out the nonsense that comes along with the rest of their worldviews and ideas. No need to discount individuals in totality, likewise no need to take them for their every word.
 
Top Bottom