• 목록
• 답변
• 글쓰기
• 게시판 리스트 옵션
  • 수정
  • 삭제

I can actually see the thinking behind this e jerkplanet.org book. Stan Friedman's speciality is debunking the debunkers. His lectures and his books take sloppy negativism to process, and turn many armchair sceptics right into a laughing stock. "Science Was Wrong" takes that normal thrust a step additional.

Throughout the historical past of science there have been 'impossibilists' who have denounced the latest discovery or technical innovation as rubbish, usually as a knee-jerk reaction. In fact, scepticism is a part of the philosophy of science - new ideas are scrutinised by friends fastidiously, and reproducible methodologies are essential to good science. This e-book has no drawback with that. The problem is the extra human factor to peer evaluation. Egos, vested pursuits, politics, moral and religious objections, and evasion of responsibility are all key parts to understanding why science can go mistaken.

The authors describe in detail many properly-documented occasions in historical past when excellent scientific work has been shot down from the sidelines by people who really should have known better. They argue that many, many lives have been lost as a result.

For instance, the invention of the jet engine, which was fist constructed in the city I live in (Gloucester, England), might have helped Britain see off the Nazis earlier on during the second world struggle if Frank Whittle's invention had only been taken significantly (pp22-7). Similarly, Goddard's early work in rocketry was debunked publicly by the new York Times, which held off forty nine years before apologising (p30). The inventor died unheralded, his work eclipsed by the German rocket scientists brought to America after the war. Inventors typically want quite a lot of tenacity, as well as imaginative and prescient, to beat the scepticism and ridicule that can be piled upon them from all kinds of instructions.

The authors argue that "technological progress comes from doing issues in another way in an unpredictable means" (p40). This notion appears to be anathema to many scientists whose considering is usually more linear and rigidly structured. Often the training of pure scientists sceptical of technological innovation is just inappropriate - they are not exposed sufficiently to the world of army research, and their experience past the slender confines of their very own speciality is insufficient to the task of judging the merits of the case. More often, but not at all times, debunkers are simply lazy:

"It's actually not scientific to do one's research by proclamation somewhat than investigation." (p40)

There are some surprises within the long record of victims of bogus scepticism. Immanuel Velikovsky may have had some unusual concepts in regards to the origins of the planet Venus, but he was right about its floor temperature, as properly as the emission of radio waves from Jupiter (p45) A extra modern instance is the ridicule heaped upon cold fusion. The authors argue convincingly that results from new research, conducted largely away from the public's gaze, is showing nice promise (Ch5). A breakthrough would have far-reaching penalties for your entire energy sector. Which, in itself, could also be the problem.

The most highly effective writing in the e-book was within the section dedicated to debunked medical breakthroughs. I discovered the section about Edward Jenner's conquest of Smallpox excellent (he was another local boy from round here, and the cartoon above features some advantageous examples of Gloucestershire people: I think I recognise a number of! As an apart to the authors, the Isle of Purbeck, the place Jenner as soon as lived for some time, is just not actually an island (p102). It is a district of Dorset the place, coincidentally, I typically take my family on vacation).

Another good chapter mentioned 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 people within the health sector, even now.

The writing becomes quite political in locations, especially when describing the American interest in Eugenics in the first half of the twentieth century. I've seen one Amazon assessment which did not just like the authors' stance on this - a remark which I find scary, frankly. The American, and other Western nations', flirtation with such authoritarian ideologies was actually a supply of disgrace, but at least America drew back from the brink. The terrifying and tragic penalties of a authorities doctrine of Eugenics in Nazi Germany have been plain for all to see. Although derived from Darwinism in a warped form of way, Eugenics itself was not a scientifically valid concept at all.

The chapters highlighting corporate negligence and industrial pollution have been also highly effective, and disturbing. Controversy rages within the chapters on Global Warming, and the environmental issues about toxic methyl mercury pollution from chemical industries and coal-fired energy stations. An inconsistency in the ebook emerges right here when the authors contemplate what, if anything, to do in regards to the energy sector's addiction to low-cost coal (evaluate p150 and p158).

The final part of the e-book looks on the scientific institution's negativity in direction of fringe analysis areas, equivalent to psi phenomena and UFOs. Having simply learn concerning the historical context of grossly unfair - and finally mistaken - scepticism, one can recognize how many modern sceptics are falling into the same traps:

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

These are robust claims indeed, but the authors do a superb job of substantiating them. Regrettably, a lot of the material in this section relies upon work previously published by the identical writers, and it looks like a re-packaging of their materials. But for a lot of not already acquainted with the scientific proof for psychic phenomena, UFOs and alien abductions there is far right here to ponder upon.