Mann's behavior toward his internal competitors is unfortunately normal in academia. Free discussion is a myth. Peer review serves to enforce orthodoxy, and the biggest forces define the correct theory and get the biggest grants, thus enlarging their force.
Mann's behavior toward external critics is NOT typical. Most academics simply ignore social media and don't bother to spend energy and money suing external critics.
Most academics don’t have hundreds of thousands of fake account silicone chips spreading intentional disingenuous bullshit about them in their work.
No one has ever informed you that speaking on topics you know nothing about is a really bad optic? Damn. You don’t have anyone who loves you in this world.
Sharon: As a physicist I say Thank You for a very reasoned commentary. Of course Real Science is all about better understanding of the Truths of our existence. The point you did not make here is that Mann, et al have edged into Political Science — which instead is all about making Policies.
It should be obvious that Truths and Policies are not synonomous. When an opponent disagrees about Truths, we can go back and look at what the evidence says. In the latter case, when an opponent disagrees about Policies, the response is different: appeal to authority (consensus, etc.)
This situation is made even worse by the change in our value system. Through the last several centuries we relied on a Judeo-Christian set of moral standards (like do unto others...).
However, Relativism has simultaneously blossomed (not accidentally) with the switch from Real Science to political science. The new value standards include such memes as the end justifies the means. That is exactly how most climate alarmists act: scortched earth policy against anyone who has the temerity to question their political policies to "save the world from pending extinction."
Real science is still science. Political science happens outside the real science world. Mainly in state and federal government sectors.
Your diatribe of semantic solid is not something a real physicist would compose. A real physician would avoid the alt fact nebulous rhetorical, gibberish world at all costs.
Hudson: you have conflated several terms in just a short reply — e.g. physician and physicist. If there is something specific that I said that is wrong, please spell it out.
Especially the point about Michael Mann, “edging into political science”…. The body politic is edging into Mann’s real science. There’s no political science involved. Just like any other real world dynamic, it is a true science. It can be quantify, dissected, analyzed and reconstituting. That’s why it’s called political SCIENCE.
You are misinformed or have formed an incorrect opinion on your own. No credible physicist would use anything but their real picture on a Substack account. Part of me, that’s redundant……
As if an opposing viewpoint made up of nothing but nebulous bovine fecal matter, deserves rebuttal?
Not by experts in the field, such as Michael Mann.
Most certainly by non public figure folk, fully informed on in the subject, such as I.
If the man was illegitimate in purveyor of intentionally disingenuous gibberish, he would not be a public figure, like you are, the reason boys come out of the woodwork to attack him at random times from random angles.
Mann's behavior toward his internal competitors is unfortunately normal in academia. Free discussion is a myth. Peer review serves to enforce orthodoxy, and the biggest forces define the correct theory and get the biggest grants, thus enlarging their force.
Mann's behavior toward external critics is NOT typical. Most academics simply ignore social media and don't bother to spend energy and money suing external critics.
Most academics don’t have hundreds of thousands of fake account silicone chips spreading intentional disingenuous bullshit about them in their work.
No one has ever informed you that speaking on topics you know nothing about is a really bad optic? Damn. You don’t have anyone who loves you in this world.
“Competitors”? What game do you think is being played here?
Thank you for exercising at the most cherished freedom! The right to say and do stupid shit. Really stupid shit.
Sharon: As a physicist I say Thank You for a very reasoned commentary. Of course Real Science is all about better understanding of the Truths of our existence. The point you did not make here is that Mann, et al have edged into Political Science — which instead is all about making Policies.
It should be obvious that Truths and Policies are not synonomous. When an opponent disagrees about Truths, we can go back and look at what the evidence says. In the latter case, when an opponent disagrees about Policies, the response is different: appeal to authority (consensus, etc.)
This situation is made even worse by the change in our value system. Through the last several centuries we relied on a Judeo-Christian set of moral standards (like do unto others...).
However, Relativism has simultaneously blossomed (not accidentally) with the switch from Real Science to political science. The new value standards include such memes as the end justifies the means. That is exactly how most climate alarmists act: scortched earth policy against anyone who has the temerity to question their political policies to "save the world from pending extinction."
Real science is still science. Political science happens outside the real science world. Mainly in state and federal government sectors.
Your diatribe of semantic solid is not something a real physicist would compose. A real physician would avoid the alt fact nebulous rhetorical, gibberish world at all costs.
Hudson: you have conflated several terms in just a short reply — e.g. physician and physicist. If there is something specific that I said that is wrong, please spell it out.
Especially the point about Michael Mann, “edging into political science”…. The body politic is edging into Mann’s real science. There’s no political science involved. Just like any other real world dynamic, it is a true science. It can be quantify, dissected, analyzed and reconstituting. That’s why it’s called political SCIENCE.
Just the entire narrative. It’s either out of context or blatant alt fact assertions.
I’m working using iPhone dictation. If you think that I think you are worthy of edit, you’re thinking is fucked up
Lots of class!
You are misinformed or have formed an incorrect opinion on your own. No credible physicist would use anything but their real picture on a Substack account. Part of me, that’s redundant……
As if an opposing viewpoint made up of nothing but nebulous bovine fecal matter, deserves rebuttal?
Not by experts in the field, such as Michael Mann.
Most certainly by non public figure folk, fully informed on in the subject, such as I.
If the man was illegitimate in purveyor of intentionally disingenuous gibberish, he would not be a public figure, like you are, the reason boys come out of the woodwork to attack him at random times from random angles.
Thank you for confirming my theory and concept.