Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

Isn't science about truth? How can there be "private science"? Isn't that like saying "private truth"? Am I missing something here?

Have you watched the video? if you did, how is this comment of yours relative to the fact that the problem exists?

How will a "free-market" capitalist voluntary nap society prevent such things?

Posted

The planet has survived ice ages, gigantic vulcano eruptions - floods of lava, an gigantic meteor impact followed by enormous tsunamis and earthquakes, climate changes as periodical events. Yeah, and a bunch of scientists who don't buy into the alarmist narrativ are blamed for an ostensible apocalypse. Science is about truth, not about alarmism, right?  ;)

Posted

This is quite interesting. In general, it can be said that capital flows to where it gains the best return.

In research, this has been interfered with by the political process. ie. funding dedicated to modeling and mitigating climate change with the assumption based on the "consensus" that climate change is man-made and can be managed through adaptive and mitigative measures etc.

 

If the above is correct, this does not preclude corruption and fabrication in privately funded research aimed at counteracting the "consensus".

After all, alot of capital is dedicated to fossil fuel production and trading.

 

In general, there are major challenges facing scientific research in terms of efficiency, validation and relevancy.

 http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21588069-scientific-research-has-changed-world-now-it-needs-change-itself-how-science-goes-wrong

 

Research and research funding has its challenges and these challenges are being exploited by partisan groups on different issues, climate change is just one example where political interests and entrenched financial interests can model using convenient variables, selectively publish results etc. In short, who pays for the research and has publishing control over the research is very important. 

IMO, how scientific research would be funded, validated, tested etc. in a free society is an important question. It is one I think Stefan has dealt with in the recent past in terms of drug-trials. 

Posted

I am not going to listen to Thomas Hartman because well, duh he's not intellectually honest or genuine. However, I assume or speculate and perhaps wrongly, that the real point of a privatized science accusation is a reference to regulatory corporatism, corporate raiding, regulatory capture, and using the state as a weapon to get the corporate welfare to do your bidding, which is indeed brutally awful for science (and a reason why I advocate open-source frame works and copyleft). 

 

If it is about global warming, screw it/irrelevant, because there are countless measurable ecological impacts related to real environmental degradation that can be blamed on regulatory capture and predatory kleptocracy. And in addition to that, the entire video by Molyneux on Net Neutralitiy is one of the best explanations of regulatory capture I've ever heard, and applys to basically all major economic sectors in Amerika and markets abroad.

 

Good science requires good ethics. 

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.