|
Post by dopeydog on Dec 5, 2008 20:20:59 GMT
Read it and weep! www.distributedrepublic.net/archives/2006/05/01/trofim-lysenko-ideology-power-and-the-destruction-of-science/A chilling quote. As told by David Joravsky in The Lysenko Affair, the reporter "confessed that he stared at Lysenko's notebook with ignorant awe. He did not understand the 'scientific laws' by which the barefoot scientists had quickly solved his problem, without trial and error." ("Barefoot" is a peculiarly Russian term to connote peasantry.) Nevertheless, this complete incomprehension didn't stop him from reporting breathlessly in the pages of Pravda that this brilliant young man had proved that a winter crop of peas could be grown in Azerbaijan, "turning the barren fields of the Transcaucasus green in winter, so that cattle will not perish from poor feeding, and the peasant Turk will live through the winter without trembling for tomorrow." When attempted in subsequent winters, the crops of peas failed. Unsurprisingly, this was not reported in the pages of Pravda (nor were Lysenko's subsequent failures in future years).
|
|
|
Post by dopeydog on Dec 6, 2008 12:51:51 GMT
From ICECAP Dec 5th: "Icecap note: Sea level varies due to changes in ice locked in glaciers and icecaps and due to expansion and contraction of the seas due to warming and cooling;. The cessation of sea level rises since 2005 implies what Josh Willis originally cponcluded from Argo buoys that the global oceans were cooling slightly was right. He was pressured by NOAA and others to change his tune and help them find some instrumental reasons why his findings were wrong. Another example of how politics trumps science in this new sorry era." Full article: wattsupwiththat.com/2008/12/05/satellite-derived-sea-level-updated-trend-has-been-shrinking-since-2005/Anyone doubt that Jim Lysenko Hansen had a hand in that.
|
|
|
Post by dopeydog on Dec 11, 2008 12:50:16 GMT
|
|
|
Post by woodstove on Dec 11, 2008 15:51:15 GMT
People really should check out the link Dopey has provided. To contemplate the multiplication of such data-massaging within the gold-standard United States temperature station system (hundreds and hundreds of instances of altered data) and then factor in what GISS does to data from the rest of the world, where there is no Anthony Watts watching their every move, is, simply put, mind-boggling. GISS unnecessarily uses Urban Heat Island contaminated data, refuses to adjust meaningfully for it, lowers values from the past, rises values from the present. What else do you need to know? All against a backdrop of horrifying scare tactics, to which, the more I think about it, the Weather Channel is a significant party. (Who else has done more to put video cameras up in the middle of nature doing what nature does and scare the pants off an unsuspecting public?) That these people then anoint themselves the more moral among us as they create economic wreckage at home and further inequities around the world (sorry, Third World, no lights for you!) is hard to take. But don't get me started ... ;D
|
|
|
Post by jorgekafkazar on Dec 12, 2008 2:02:42 GMT
I want to state explicitly what the attraction of Lysenkoism was for the Commufascists of the USSR: Built into Lysenkoism was the notion (attributed to Lamarck, but postulated by others) that if you stretched, severed, compressed, forced, and tortured members of a species into a particular shape, their descendants would inherit those qualities. The attraction to the Party was their extrapolation of Lysenkoist thought into the concept that after several generations of a reign of terror, there would be no more dissenters. Everyone would be a good, malleable, obeiscent Commufascist. When I first started reading this thread, I thought the reference to Lysenko was a joke. It isn't. Ahead of us is a nightmare in green, where the human species is to be stretched, severed, compressed, forced and tortured into an elite's model of perfect and obeiscent ecovictims. The process is already well underway--scientists were the first wave to fall. We're next, starting with our children: I met a teacher the other day who said she was afraid to tell her students that what they were learning about AGW might not be the complete truth. Lysenkoism is alive and well in your hometown.
|
|
|
Post by Acolyte on Dec 12, 2008 8:13:33 GMT
Some years back I started on a journey. It began with what happened to hemp, continued through what we know about sodium fluoride & eventually, led here to see what's going on with the Sun.
Along the byways I kept seeing the same or very similar road signs & slowly, inexorably, I was led towards a conclusion that, TBH, both scares & angers me. Unfortunately, it seems I & others like me have been predicted & there is in place an educational system that has pacified nearly all those who might, given the facts, rise up in arms.
You can walk those roads if you want - just ask yourself, how are these things happening in so many areas & who benefits. And remember, just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean they're not after me. In other words, just because someone appears crazy doesn't mean that everything they say is BS. Even nutters can know some truth.
When there is manipulation, SOMEONE is doing it & SOMEONE stands to gain - people do not do such things for the hell of it, they have a purpose.
Lysenko might have been power mad or misled or whatever, but Lamarck turns out to have been closer to the truth than we have been told. DNA is not the be-all of inheritance & we have solid evidence that environment can influence strongly which genes get turned on or off.
Sometimes what we know to be true simply isn't & sometimes the 'truth' we've been assured is true is being put in place for a reason. Cellular biology leads straight out of a pure physical body if you look closely enough. Scientific method is being used to prove non-physical abilities not just in humans but in Life.
But like agw, these things are subject to a desire to make us believe what someone wants us to believe because it reduces our ability to cope with the world & makes us easier to subdue.
It seems I'm a nutcase, right? Yet I have fought against this stuff all my life, striving to stick to the 'sane' 'scientific' truth - only to find there is no such thing, that we are being lied to wholesale, that history has been rewritten to hide basic facts from us & that even the institutions supposedly built to be for us are covers for keeping us down.
agw is just another step along the way. They practiced the method with flouride & passive smoking - they've got it down pat & their disciples are those on whom the educational system worked best, because they are the ones who truly believe in Truth by Authority.
Here's a clue - did you know all US presidents have royal blood? Even Obama? When i first saw that assertion I simply didn't believe it - later I saw it again so I checked it out.
All of them. GWB & Kerry, GWB & Gore - they are virtually cousins, & according to Burkes Peerage, the one who wins has the closest ties to European royalty. Obama's mother was a Payne.
Look it up on Genealogy sites. And ask yourself, how is it possible that, in a supposed democracy, the only people elected to the highest position have ties back into one extended familial group?
OK... I'm done now. My rant is over & I will go back to my corner. But you CAN ask those questions &, while the internet is still relatively uncontrolled (which won't last long BTW) you can find the links. Walk your path, look up the names, follow the history & the money.
|
|
|
Post by tobyglyn on Dec 12, 2008 12:12:06 GMT
Umm, when was Kerry President?
|
|
|
Post by Acolyte on Dec 12, 2008 12:27:03 GMT
Umm, when was Kerry President? *grins* He wasn't... nor was Gore. But in two elections there were 'cousins' competing for the vote. The US couldn't not vote for a 'royal' president. But don't take my word for it - go look. Then think through the implications of it. Happy travelling on the path.
|
|
|
Post by Belushi TD on Dec 12, 2008 20:40:13 GMT
Part of the reasons for the problems iwth our education system is that, due to many reasons, the best and the brightest usually (not always, but usually) don't go in for teaching.
As a result, when a student questions a mediocer or bad teacher, they get a variation of the "Because I said so" or "because the book said so". These people either don't know enough or don't care enough to go into the details of what the student was asking. As a result, its the simple case that holds sway, and people are conditioned to not question. And we all know that the simple case is only true in very limited circumstances.
So we've shot ourselves in the foot, particularly when we do things like "no child left behind". No matter how much money you throw at the problem, there ARE going to be kids who either CAN'T learn or WON'T learn. If you refuse to learn, well... the world needs ditch diggers too. There has to come a point where you are spending far more than its worth to cram a few more equations or historical facts into an unwilling kid's head. Coupled with teachers who don't care or are very bad at what they do, then the kids are even less likely to learn, and the money gets tossed down a rathole.
Belushi TD
|
|
|
Post by tobyglyn on Dec 12, 2008 21:17:05 GMT
Umm, when was Kerry President? *grins* He wasn't... nor was Gore. But in two elections there were 'cousins' competing for the vote. The US couldn't not vote for a 'royal' president. But don't take my word for it - go look. Then think through the implications of it. Happy travelling on the path. I say bah to all that conspiracy theory stuff! If you really want a scary path to travel down, try UFOs/alien abduction/fairies etc..... but enough off topic from me
|
|
|
Post by Acolyte on Dec 12, 2008 22:18:09 GMT
Part of the reasons for the problems iwth our education system is that, due to many reasons, the best and the brightest usually (not always, but usually) don't go in for teaching. As a result, when a student questions a mediocer or bad teacher, they get a variation of the "Because I said so" or "because the book said so". These people either don't know enough or don't care enough to go into the details of what the student was asking. As a result, its the simple case that holds sway, and people are conditioned to not question. And we all know that the simple case is only true in very limited circumstances. So we've shot ourselves in the foot, particularly when we do things like "no child left behind". No matter how much money you throw at the problem, there ARE going to be kids who either CAN'T learn or WON'T learn. If you refuse to learn, well... the world needs ditch diggers too. There has to come a point where you are spending far more than its worth to cram a few more equations or historical facts into an unwilling kid's head. Coupled with teachers who don't care or are very bad at what they do, then the kids are even less likely to learn, and the money gets tossed down a rathole. Belushi TD I think it's a little deeper than that - those things are a result not a cause for the problem. Noam Chomsky has some interesting things to say on it & to get specific, so does Charlotte Thomson Iserbyt. The system wasn't really chosen to 'advance mankind' or any noble goal like that - it came from Prussia & was designed originally to produce good cannon fodder. But you're right about the shot in the foot moetaphor. We're caught in a loop. Lysenko got away with what he did because their education system didn't teach people to think & learn only what they can verify. Ours is now allowing the same kind of methods to be used by Hansen et al - they get set up as Authority & so people believe it's getting dangerously warmer even while they are putting on their coats in December (or June for the NH) But again, the question isn't what is happening so much as Why? Who gains? Most of these things deliver results later - the Education system didn't immediately deliver non-thinkers - it had to get to at least 2nd generation before the results begin to come in any major way. So those bringing in the system & imposing it didn't really stand to gain much. Why did they do it?
|
|
|
Post by Acolyte on Dec 12, 2008 22:25:02 GMT
I say bah to all that conspiracy theory stuff! If you really want a scary path to travel down, try UFOs/alien abduction/fairies etc..... but enough off topic from me UFO's etc are interesting, not so much for the content as because that seems to be the subject that coined & defined the term Conspiracy Theory - enough woo-woos came out of nowhere early on to convince people that anyone labelled a CT was a nutter. Now, even those who come forward with possibly valuable information cop the label & all the sheeple back away slowly, not making eye contact. Your reaction is typical - it all seems so 'out there' & 'nutty' that the rational thing to do seems to be to reject it all out of hand. And labelling those who talk about it is an imposed behaviour designed to ensure the sheep patrol the prison walls. It's a lovely cover for getting away with almost anything if you think about it. There's none so imprisoned as those who think they are already free & so convince themselves not to see the walls. Particularly in a world where people are taught from very early to simply accept what they are told by anyone set up as an Authority. And now they've co-opted Science as the new manipulable 'Authority' we've lost our best tool in trying to discern truth from lie.
|
|
|
Post by tobyglyn on Dec 13, 2008 1:15:20 GMT
Your reaction is typical - it all seems so 'out there' & 'nutty' that the rational thing to do seems to be to reject it all out of hand. And labelling those who talk about it is an imposed behaviour designed to ensure the sheep patrol the prison walls...... Settle down, I seem to have pressed one of your buttons and certainly you misunderstood my reference to UFOs/alien abduction/fairies as I am one of those people that seem to be very interesting to whatever they are. I've had many, many experiences, very close encounters, since my early childhood as have others in my family. I don't know how to explain that stuff and am very uncomfortable even talking about it so I certainly won't be going any further with it here - it's also way off topic.
|
|
|
Post by Acolyte on Dec 13, 2008 2:52:03 GMT
Relax, I only meant 'typical' in its proper sense - it is a common reaction to anything along these lines. There will be people who think this thread is off the plot because of the inferences about Lysenkoism.
I wasn't having a go either at you or the UFO area, & no buttons were pushed at my end.
I figured I had an opportunity to make the posts I did & if one person looks further into it, the effort was worth it.
regards...
|
|
|
Post by socold on Dec 14, 2008 14:48:45 GMT
But he just assumes the adjustment is wrong.
|
|