Science A Conspiracy?

[nonaeroterraqueous]

There's no conspiracy. They...uh, we aren't actively working together to spread deliberate lies. It just happens that we're humans, prone to all of the same stupid fantasies, rumors and fashions as everyone else. Not only that, but I find that scientists get most of their information from the same non-scientific news sources as everyone else, which tends to perpetuate certain idiotic falsehoods. Add to that one huge advantage, that a scientist carries a certain respect and an ability to speak either truth or error in a way that non-scientists either cannot understand or cannot refute, and you're left with an influential bunch of ordinary people. In the west, it's getting to be a bunch of influential ordinary immoral people. I'm sorry. I wish it weren't so, but it's not going to change until the end of things.

 

[nonaeroterraqueous]

No, you are not alone sadly. There are many who deny science whilst sitting at their computers which just appeared by magic.

There are also many people who formulate non sequitur arguments using one man's invention to bolster another man's pseudoscience.

 

[Edial]

There are also many people who formulate non sequitur arguments using one man's invention to bolster another man's pseudoscience.

I missed Dilbert.

 

[morningstar2651]

Patents are purchased and science is rolled out gradually to make the most money one can make.

How can we possibly introduce alternative energies, such as cars running on water, much of Tesla's work when every patent is being bought out by people who run the business of today?

Let's talk a bit how patents work and a real problem facing the patent industry.

Patents come from Article I, Section 8, Clause 8 of the US Constitution.

"To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries."​

Patents and copyrights are designed to promote innovation and creation rather than copying and imitation. They give inventors and creators temporary monopolies on their creations and inventions which puts other creators and innovators in a situation where they must either create something new or pay a licensing fee to the owner of the patent or copyright to use the IP in an agreed-upon way.

Patents are probably the most difficult intellectual property to acquire with the shortest lifespan.

• You own a copyright on original creative works the moment you create them (though it is recommended to register the copyright to sue for damages in the case of infringement). Copyright registration is cheap and fast and you own the copyright until 75 years after your death.
• A trade secret simply requires that you take reasonable steps to keep the trade secret a secret. The trade secret protections exist so long as you maintain the steps to keep it a secret. KFC's 11 herbs and spices or Coca-Cola's formula are examples of trade secrets.
• A trademark is relatively simple to register and renew - so long as the mark is being used in commerce you can own it indefinitely.
• A patent is expensive to register, has a long application process, and requires the assistance of a lawyer and an engineer. Patents last 20 years (only 14 years for design patents).

The abuse of the patent system doesn't typically come from inventors but instead from patent trolls. A patent troll uses patents as legal weapons, instead of actually creating any new products or coming up with new ideas. Instead of making their money from inventions, patent trolls make their money by buying cheap patents from companies that are down on their luck and are selling off assets. The patent office has a bad habit of issuing patents for unpatentable things, such as commonsense or broadly used non-innovative processes. The patent troll sends threats of legal action to companies using these commonsense processes - the victims of the patent troll can either pay a license fee or pay even more for a long court battle they may lose.

Here are some good links to read if you're interested in learning more on this subject - our current patent laws need some reforms to prevent this kind of abuse.

• 2011 in Review: Patents Misused to Stifle Innovation
  
• NTP, Inc.
• Lodsys, LLC.
• Acacia Research

 

[morningstar2651]

There are also many people who formulate non sequitur arguments using one man's invention to bolster another man's pseudoscience.

I think you may have misunderstood his argument. Useful inventions such as medical procedures and electronic devices are a byproduct of science and not of pseudoscience. If you have cancer you don't go see an alchemist, you go to see an oncologist. If you want to know what the weather will be like tomorrow you don't consult the tarot cards, you instead check the news for a forecast from a meteorologist.

 

[morningstar2651]

Not all, but many scientists (in my opinion) are overly dependent on grants and other financial support of businessmen.

How should scientists work and be paid?

But is there an outright conspiracy where scientists plainly lie?

In the sense of one grand conspiracy of scientists? Nope. There are scientists who lie, but it would be dishonest to label this behavior a conspiracy and there are consequences for scientific misconduct.

There are for example some architects and engineers (not many, very few as compared to the 1000s of others) who say that 911 collapse of buildings (including the steel core mesh in 10 seconds ) is a natural result of fires.
Completely absurd, especially when the 3rd collapsed building was never hit by a plane.

If you have evidence that contradicts the conclusions of the investigation perhaps you should publish this evidence in a scientific journal. However, I highly doubt you have evidence of what you think you have evidence of. If we're talking about WTC7 there is already a good article on what happened published in a magazine dedicated to structural engineering. Debris from the collapse of WTC1 & 2 impacted with WTC7 and is the source of the fire.

Yes, scientists are used for their opinions, because regular folks simply cannot double-check.
How can you I double check an opinion of a brain surgeon.

Peer review.

 

[willbill]

How in the world did the 9/11 conspiracy thread creep in here

!!

 

[timewerx]

Am I alone in believing that Science is one of the biggest conspiracies out there?

God states in the N.T., "I will confound their wisdom with foolishness.." Are we witnessing that verse being fulfilled?

Mainstream corporate-funded science that is... Their singular goal is how to make more profit.

Independent-natured science are the ones who make the difference - these are often researchers in the sustainability field. They may not have afterburners or hi-fi or HD or digital wizardry but aims to make human society more sustainable, not necessarily more profitable.

 

[timewerx]

How should scientists work and be paid?

I'm an independent inventor working on alternative sustainable technologies.

All of my fundings come from my measly salary as a secretary.

Ironically, in keeping with the nature of sustainability, my inventions had to be as low-tech and inexpensive as possible, yet deliver cutting edge performance, even exceeding similar products which are 100x more costly.

The only problems I face is in my residence. My temporary residence at present is proving to be most difficult somewhere in the middle east and securing some parts I need is next to impossible even if I can afford it.

 

[morningstar2651]

I'm an independent inventor working on alternative sustainable technologies.

All of my fundings come from my measly salary as a secretary.

Ironically, in keeping with the nature of sustainability, my inventions had to be as low-tech and inexpensive as possible, yet deliver cutting edge performance, even exceeding similar products which are 100x more costly.

The only problems I face is in my residence. My temporary residence at present is proving to be most difficult somewhere in the middle east and securing some parts I need is next to impossible even if I can afford it.

That's a tough constraint to adhere to. It's difficult to develop anything without adequate resources, but this constraint also ensures that the things you invent will be feasible in poorer countries. Have you read Abundance? I think it might be right up your alley.

I know that many countries are looking to become oil independent. There are technology incubator programs you can get into to help kickstart your funding.

 

[timewerx]

That's a tough constraint to adhere to. It's difficult to develop anything without adequate resources, but this constraint also ensures that the things you invent will be feasible in poorer countries. Have you read Abundance? I think it might be right up your alley.

I know that many countries are looking to become oil independent. There are technology incubator programs you can get into to help kickstart your funding.

Thank you.

But money or funding is not the problem but the difficulty of getting the parts I want. Like where I live at the moment, we have no real residential address but the company's. So things I order would likely just get lost or stolen.

Also local parts are either missing the things I need or are difficult or far too inconvenient to get. Something you can get for 30 mins via short drive to Sears, you may never get here. Middle East is probably the worst place for you to be inventing stuff.

So I'm holding off until I found an insanely crazy way to make it really low tech, or find a job that is not in the Middle East!

What I am trying to make, simply a different way to convert heat into mechanical energy, but this one will have double the efficiency you use on your car and can use ANY heat source.

But I'm not wasting my time anyway. Until I could resume out of convenience, I could continue my petty project on AI. At least computer-based, programming projects, is far easier to accomplish than anything that requires hardware at the moment.

 

[Rick Otto]

I would like to see some evidence for your claim that 'very few' architects and engineers say that the collapse of the buildings were a natural result of (the impacts AND) the fires.
Btodd

Not me I would not be interested in any evidence whatsoever because I saw a concrete and steel skyscraper free fall into its own footprint... believe whatever you want. So will I.

 

[Rick Otto]

How in the world did the 9/11 conspiracy thread creep in here

It didn't creep.
I don't appreciate the question.

 

[Rick Otto]

Yes, and it's frightening to know such dependency.

It's frightening because it is baloney.
The uncertainty principle should keep these science worshippers silent.

 

[Rick Otto]

I think you may have misunderstood his argument. Useful inventions such as medical procedures and electronic devices are a byproduct of science and not of pseudoscience. If you have cancer you don't go see an alchemist, you go to see an oncologist. If you want to know what the weather will be like tomorrow you don't consult the tarot cards, you instead check the news for a forecast from a meteorologist.

Tarot cards would probably be competitive.
There's the ideal science on one hand, but in the other we have commercial science, practical science,"independent" studies,...
I don't think you understood his reply.
Science is not magically objective.

 

[Btodd]

Not me I would not be interested in any evidence whatsoever because I saw a concrete and steel skyscraper free fall into its own footprint... believe whatever you want. So will I.

This is one of those phrases uttered over and over that doesn't mean anything...'into its own footprint'. Where else was it supposed to fall?


Btodd

 

[Loudmouth]

Not all, but many scientists (in my opinion) are overly dependent on grants and other financial support of businessmen.

You do realize that there are grant institutions that use public tax dollars, right? These include the NIH and NSF which are two big granting institutions for biology and physical sciences, respectively. Their budget comes straight from the US Congress.

I don't know if this is still the case, but it used to be that any inventions that are discovered as part of publically funded research projects can not be patented and are free for the public to use.

 

[morningstar2651]

You do realize that there are grant institutions that use public tax dollars, right? These include the NIH and NSF which are two big granting institutions for biology and physical sciences, respectively. Their budget comes straight from the US Congress.

I don't know if this is still the case, but it used to be that any inventions that are discovered as part of publically funded research projects can not be patented and are free for the public to use.

Government works.

 

[Rick Otto]

This is one of those phrases uttered over and over that doesn't mean anything...'into its own footprint'. Where else was it supposed to fall?


Btodd

"...doesn't mean anything" is one of those phrases used over and over, too.
Where have all the other buildings hit or burned fall?

They don't.

But believe what you're supposed to.

 

[Btodd]

"...doesn't mean anything" is one of those phrases used over and over, too.
Where have all the other buildings hit or burned fall?

They don't.

But believe what you're supposed to.

Hey, I understand gravity. You can, too.


Btodd