Myth of Selfless Science – Rural Tompkins County

“The World According to Doctrine” — rISE OF THE eVil oNES – Scientists: They’re not Sorcerers

The Myth of Responsible Science: If scientists had taken the responsibility to speak out to the public about the dangers of climate change – something would have been done to prevent the hopeless situation that we’re in now. Science could have warned us; but scientists didn’t. The same is true of so many of the world-wide problems: from pandemics to the loss of clean water and arable land, to famine and overpopulation. Solving these problems would require regulations and oversight that would restrict the actions of politicians, corporations, and institutions: so scientists take the money, deplore the end uses, and claim a dedication to “pure science.”

There is nothing pure about science — because there’s nothing pure about its funding and uses. Emerging technologies represent an unprecedented opportunity to oppress, remold, and destroy humanity . . . look for it to happen.

“The World According to Doctrine” — Science News

There’s nothing like wars and other human enabled disasters for ensuring scientific progress; and employment.

The same scientific community that was so closed-mouthed as we raced into an industrial-pollution death spiral — has become proactive in protecting their sources of funding and fame.

Is this news story really so farfetched?

“The World According to Doctrine” — “The Un-Scientific Method”

Science. Science. Science: If you say it over and over it gains a sense of importance. But say it a thousand times: and it still won’t make you happy.

“The World According to Doctrine” — New Definition: “Political Science”

Science has increasingly viewed the universe from a human perspective – greed, vanity, and arrogance – and “fact-based” science has become the silent partner in a congress of regulatory fraud.

Codifying profitable viewpoints to exclude debate and oversight is an important part of mainstream science in our disintegrating New Millennium world.

But the slow dissolution of our lives isn’t my greatest fear – what happens when the shape a disastrous reality begins to appear through the scientific smokescreen?

If what’s happening now is the result of their palliatives — what will their desperate solutions be like?

“The World According to Doctrine” — “If psychiatrists were accountable . . .”

It’s a world of power – without accountability. Of authority – without oversight. Whether it’s the Girl Card, the Race Card, or the Official Card – it’s a game of bureaucracy that allows some players to play by a different set of rules. It’s a corruption that balances the books – and won’t allow any auditing.

“If you want to know the end, look at the beginning.” – African Proverb

It’s not going to end well.

“New Book” – “Flow Chart Poetry 3”

Like the Sorcerer’s Apprentice; modern science takes great pride in its knowledge of how to make things happen — without the wisdom of learning how to make them stop.

Our world is like a giant Jeopardy show; with scientists guessing at the answers – in a competition for fame, fortune, and the realization of a dream.

And if they guess wrong, and it’s Game Over for all of us — at least they got their time in the spotlight.

“All Roads Lead to Cornithaca” – “Emerging Technologies” Bumper sticker

“Building the future of human existence on the vagaries of human nature.” With emerging technologies; there is no safety margin – because we don’t know what is safe. There is no remediation – because we may all be extinct. And there is no responsibility – because holding a scientific theory accountable is like enforcing an unsigned contract.

The safety of Emerging Technologies is not “an exact science” – it’s a gamble — and we’re putting more and more of our chips on the table.

“All Roads Lead to Cornithaca” – “Nano Nano” Road signs

Trusting the judgement of someone who has Fame, Fortune, and the realization of a dream in the balance can come at a price.

“Nanotechnology” proponents refute the doomsday scenario of The Extinction of All Life On Earth with: “the danger of gray goo is far less likely than originally thought” – and “such dangers lie too far in the future to be of concern to regulators” – or the “more realistic threats associated with knowledge-enabled nanoterrorism” — none of which sounds like, “it can’t happen” or “impossible.”

While the loss of human life from the “unexpected consequences” of emerging technologies falls under the “shit happens” umbrella of scientific progress – scientists do labor under one constant fear — loss of funding.

In an ever degrading and irremediable biosphere; Our technological morality play reads like the script of a horror movie: And no matter how much you shout at the screen — they never learn.

“All Roads Lead to Cornithaca” – “End of Days” Activities Text

When you read those articles that discuss the advantages and disadvantages of new technology, and the risks inherent in low-probability, high-impact outcomes from emerging technologies: there is one important factor that never seems to be included — the benefit to scientists.

With the prospect of fame, fortune, and the realization of a dream in the balance; these scientists are the last people you can expect to give an impartial and unbiased opinion; and yet they are frequently the decision makers in our “should we risk it” scenario building.

Human nature is not something that only operates outside the boundaries of Science. And the Scientific Method demands that they be allowed to experiment to the end limits of their instrumentality – and beyond. Even if it’s the End of the World — They were the ones who brought it about. Megalomaniacs and Doomsday devices operate all the more freely behind today’s Selfless Science façade.

Not with a bang but a Nobel Prize winning obsession.

“All Roads Lead to Cornithaca” – “Chernobyl wasn’t an accident” Bumper sticker

“Chernobyl wasn’t an accident: It was a safety test.” Leaving aside other interpretations: If the reactions of authorities to the Chernobyl disaster is a test of our future safety – How safe are we?

Let’s look at the “fallout” — in spite of the willful disregard, and deliberate subordination of safety; to monetary, political, and personal agendas – both before and after the “incident”: nuclear proponents insist on labeling it an “accident” – implying that on one is to blame.

The very fact that such a thing can happen; shows that it can happen again — unless you can change human nature.

Some scientists now believe they should contemplate the possible risks from advancing a technology: “wherein slight permutations of initial conditions can lead to unforeseen and profoundly negative downstream effects, for which the technologist and the new technology’s proponents must be held accountable.”

In their worst-case scenario: all life on earth may be extinguished; but someone will be held accountable afterward? — Is that the best that science logic can do?