It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Scientists: Earth Endangered by New Strain of Fact-Resistant Humans

page: 1
49
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:
+29 more 
posted on May, 13 2015 @ 08:32 AM
link   

MINNEAPOLIS (The Borowitz Report) – Scientists have discovered a powerful new strain of fact-resistant humans who are threatening the ability of Earth to sustain life, a sobering new study reports.

The research, conducted by the University of Minnesota, identifies a virulent strain of humans who are virtually immune to any form of verifiable knowledge, leaving scientists at a loss as to how to combat them.
-- www.newyorker.com...

If this is supposed to be satire; why does it "feel" so right-on?

It seem that increasingly people simply refuse to actually "look" at the reality, the facts, the real world data, and come up with some barely related "notion" of their own...

I guess I'm just some relic of the ancient past; I rely on science, and data for everything.




posted on May, 13 2015 @ 08:43 AM
link   

originally posted by: tanka418

MINNEAPOLIS (The Borowitz Report) – Scientists have discovered a powerful new strain of fact-resistant humans who are threatening the ability of Earth to sustain life, a sobering new study reports.

The research, conducted by the University of Minnesota, identifies a virulent strain of humans who are virtually immune to any form of verifiable knowledge, leaving scientists at a loss as to how to combat them.
-- www.newyorker.com...

If this is supposed to be satire; why does it "feel" so right-on?

It seem that increasingly people simply refuse to actually "look" at the reality, the facts, the real world data, and come up with some barely related "notion" of their own...

I guess I'm just some relic of the ancient past; I rely on science, and data for everything.


Is this the onion?

It seems like the onion.

BTW, this is all just hyperbole.

There are many times more people today with scientific backgrounds, vs those in the past.

I don't get it.

Is this because people aren't buying the AGW bs?



posted on May, 13 2015 @ 08:44 AM
link   

originally posted by: tanka418

MINNEAPOLIS (The Borowitz Report) – Scientists have discovered a powerful new strain of fact-resistant humans who are threatening the ability of Earth to sustain life, a sobering new study reports.

The research, conducted by the University of Minnesota, identifies a virulent strain of humans who are virtually immune to any form of verifiable knowledge, leaving scientists at a loss as to how to combat them.
-- www.newyorker.com...

If this is supposed to be satire; why does it "feel" so right-on?

It seem that increasingly people simply refuse to actually "look" at the reality, the facts, the real world data, and come up with some barely related "notion" of their own...

I guess I'm just some relic of the ancient past; I rely on science, and data for everything.


While it is indeed a satirical piece, this one is so full of truth that it seems deserving of a new classification.

Something like "Freudian Satire."

F&S


+1 more 
posted on May, 13 2015 @ 08:46 AM
link   
At least they put a positive spin on it....


While reaffirming the gloomy assessments of the study, Logsdon held out hope that the threat of fact-resistant humans could be mitigated in the future. “Our research is very preliminary, but it’s possible that they will become more receptive to facts once they are in an environment without food, water, or oxygen,” he said.



posted on May, 13 2015 @ 08:48 AM
link   
a reply to: tanka418

The same scientists rammed the theory of relativity down the publics throats and when has that ever been proven. Verified means conclusively proven. That hasn't happened. If that theory is wrong it means the speed of light isn't limited to C.



posted on May, 13 2015 @ 08:51 AM
link   

"The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it." -Neil DeGrasse Tyson



posted on May, 13 2015 @ 08:55 AM
link   
a reply to: tanka418




I rely on science, and data for everything.



sadly...Science doesn't always rely on data like yourself.

Models are a new craze that's sweeping the world.



posted on May, 13 2015 @ 08:56 AM
link   
The good thing about history is that it reveals where people stuffed up. Scientists are people they are not immune from stuff ups.


+4 more 
posted on May, 13 2015 @ 09:03 AM
link   

originally posted by: LeatherNLace

"The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it." -Neil DeGrasse Tyson


I'm surprised Mr. Tyson visualizes science as a "thing" inferring truth. I believe what he wanted to say is:

"The good thing about scientists is they determine what truth is and then they ignore everything else."

Scientific hypothesis are wrong far more than they are right. Settled science is when the scientific process is corrupted and becomes a meme. These memes and their operatives are enemies of science.



posted on May, 13 2015 @ 09:04 AM
link   

originally posted by: tanka418

MINNEAPOLIS (The Borowitz Report) – Scientists have discovered a powerful new strain of fact-resistant humans who are threatening the ability of Earth to sustain life, a sobering new study reports.

The research, conducted by the University of Minnesota, identifies a virulent strain of humans who are virtually immune to any form of verifiable knowledge, leaving scientists at a loss as to how to combat them.
-- www.newyorker.com...

If this is supposed to be satire; why does it "feel" so right-on?

It seem that increasingly people simply refuse to actually "look" at the reality, the facts, the real world data, and come up with some barely related "notion" of their own...

I guess I'm just some relic of the ancient past; I rely on science, and data for everything.


Most people are in fact "faith-based," not evidence-based thinkers.

Scientific thinking means one purposefully gathers as much data, information, opinions, and facts as they can on any topic, and THEN choose the belief/hypothesis that accounts for all of the verifiable information found so far. If new information is found that violates it, you revisit the hypothesis, change it, or even swap it for a more comprehensive one.

Most people, on the other hand, do the opposite. They just take whatever cultural, religious, familial, or personal beliefs they have been taught or developed and then seek to always find new information to confirm those ideas and often will ignore or fight against any new information.



posted on May, 13 2015 @ 09:04 AM
link   

originally posted by: SLAYER69
At least they put a positive spin on it....


While reaffirming the gloomy assessments of the study, Logsdon held out hope that the threat of fact-resistant humans could be mitigated in the future. “Our research is very preliminary, but it’s possible that they will become more receptive to facts once they are in an environment without food, water, or oxygen,” he said.


Kind of funny (read odd) that this satirical piece looks at killing dissenters. I guess that would include bible thumpers, creationists, intelligent design pundits and conspiracy "theorists" (since most conspiracy other than blatant hoax appears to be more fact). Sounds like this totalitarian meritocracy is going to be fun! (I imagine you see my sarcasm lol).

Cheers - Dave



posted on May, 13 2015 @ 09:06 AM
link   

originally posted by: InverseLookingGlass

originally posted by: LeatherNLace

"The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it." -Neil DeGrasse Tyson


I'm surprised Mr. Tyson visualizes science as a "thing" inferring truth. I believe what he wanted to say is:

"The good thing about scientists is they determine what truth is and then they ignore everything else."

Scientific hypothesis are wrong far more than they are right. Settled science is when the scientific process is corrupted and becomes a meme. These memes and their operatives are enemies of science.


Oh man, not another science denialist.

Are scientists and theories wrong sometimes? For sure.

But guess what, factually speaking the more advanced forms of the scientific process are by FAR the best thing we have to gather information, test ideas, build evidence, etc. That goes for every topic of life.

Sorry, the scientific method > solely logic, opinion, faith-based beliefs, arguments from authority, etc. This has been demonstrated time and time again. The former is simply far more rigorous.



posted on May, 13 2015 @ 09:09 AM
link   

originally posted by: AthlonSavage
a reply to: tanka418

The same scientists rammed the theory of relativity down the publics throats and when has that ever been proven. Verified means conclusively proven. That hasn't happened. If that theory is wrong it means the speed of light isn't limited to C.



Your verbage alone would indicate a minimal amount of scientific research training. For example, "proven" is not in the lexicon of scientific theory usually. Scientific data "supports," with a high degree of probability, a concept.

And, you guys need to stop dismissing a huge range of fields because some scientists or researchers in a single field may or may not be saying something you disagree with.



posted on May, 13 2015 @ 09:13 AM
link   
"immune", "resistant" "strain"

hmmmm,
I wonder what "facts" they are resistant to?

Seems more like a dig at a certain group to me.

Nice they want to kill them off though. (sarcasm icon here)



posted on May, 13 2015 @ 09:13 AM
link   


“Ignorance is hardly unusual. The longer I live, the more I come to realize that it is the natural state of the human mind. There are many who will strive to defend its sanctity and then expect you to be impressed with their efforts.”
― Brandon Sanderson,


So many have let their ideology get in the way of their common sense!!



posted on May, 13 2015 @ 09:20 AM
link   

originally posted by: MarioOnTheFly
a reply to: tanka418




I rely on science, and data for everything.



sadly...Science doesn't always rely on data like yourself.

Models are a new craze that's sweeping the world.


Science has always relied on models. It isn't a new craze. Models are what science uses to predict future events, and they are built by analyzing prior events.
edit on 13-5-2015 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 13 2015 @ 09:23 AM
link   
a reply to: Quetzalcoatl14

Incredible claims require incredible proof. So far your just mouthing replies angled with personnel innuendo. Your the typical mouth who will be a debunker or skeptic, you cant offer any real data only slingy insults. So the theory of relativity its the bigger daddy of unverified science. The floor is now all yours genius to prove its fact.



posted on May, 13 2015 @ 09:28 AM
link   
a reply to: tanka418

Nice attack from the AGW priests. "Resistant to facts"?! I guess that depends on what they call "facts", doesn't it now, eh?

Funny how they do not address the "strain of 'scientists'" who have been caught "correcting" raw data to make it suit the AGW theory.



posted on May, 13 2015 @ 09:43 AM
link   

originally posted by: AthlonSavage
a reply to: Quetzalcoatl14

Incredible claims require incredible proof. So far your just mouthing replies angled with personnel innuendo. Your the typical mouth who will be a debunker or skeptic, you cant offer any real data only slingy insults. So the theory of relativity its the bigger daddy of unverified science. The floor is now all yours genius to prove its fact.



No, what you are doing is violating another dictum of both logic and science, the logical fallacy of over generalization. You are also attempting to use a single scientific hypothesis to invalidate countless other VERY well researched theories in other domains. This is fallacious and intellectually dishonest at best.

Science ranges in how falsifiable and certain it can be, usually on a continuum from micro to macro. But again, generally speaking scientific research, peer review, etc, aimed at any topic, is going to be a far more rigorous process of analysis than random-ass citizens philosophizing or opining on topics.

That.... is the point. There simply isn't something better that we have to assess info.



posted on May, 13 2015 @ 09:44 AM
link   
a reply to: tanka418

I wonder when the follow-up article will be written concerning the invassive species of scientist capable producing "facts" from manipulated data and thin air.

I'm not saying that they all do, but it does seem that those with the biggest bullhorn in the most controversial areas of science are consistently being called out for faulty data or secrecy behind data or flat-out conspiratorial manipulation of data. And I'm not saying that it's only happening on one "side" of the debates, but I am pointing out that it's a massive problem that negates the ability to trust in much of modern science (like, within the past 30 years or so) pertaining to questionable scientific conclusions.



new topics

top topics



 
49
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join