Well, I've spent an interesting morning digging through a website I came across via a comment on Art's private blog.
Here's the site: Them and Us. There's also a book by Danny Vendramini, which I've ordered and look forward to getting (shipped from Australia at a heafty shipping fee). The first three chapters are available for free.
One thing that particularly drew me into looking closely at this was the author.
I've been studying evolutionary biology for ten years but decided against the PhD route. For cutting edge theoretical science, there are real advantages in working outside the university system. Academia discourages risk-taking and there can be no major scientific success without risk. [...]
You need two kinds of scientists. People who are into experimentation, detailed observation and analysis. They're unquestionably the backbone of scientific progress. But you also need a few left-field people who can look at the big picture and envisage new paradigms and possibilities.
I think he's exactly right about that, especially in an age where there's so much financial reward and prestige available to those scientists who serve to prop up conventional "wisdom" because conventional "wisdom" is the foundation of authoritarian, centralized, force-backed political structures. In other words, the state and its mega-corporation bedfellows are more than willing to pay for scientists to tell them what they want to hear, giving a false aura of credibility to the whole incestuous charade.
If he turns out to be correct, provided we can come to some strong confidence in the matter, can anyone speculate as to how this might change our overall view of evolution?
Related posts:
- By the Numbers
- Thinking Through It
- Dr. Michael Eades in Action
- Unbridled Reductionism vs. Common Sense
- What Do You Think You Know About LDL Cholesterol? (Pt 2 of 2)
Well, I've spent an interesting morning digging through a website I came across via a comment on Art's private blog.
Here's the site: Them and Us. There's also a book by Danny Vendramini, which I've ordered and look forward to getting (shipped from Australia at a heafty shipping fee). The first three chapters are available for free.
One thing that particularly drew me into looking closely at this was the author.
I think he's exactly right about that, especially in an age where there's so much financial reward and prestige available to those scientists who serve to prop up conventional "wisdom" because conventional "wisdom" is the foundation of authoritarian, centralized, force-backed political structures. In other words, the state and its mega-corporation bedfellows are more than willing to pay for scientists to tell them what they want to hear, giving a false aura of credibility to the whole incestuous charade.
If he turns out to be correct, provided we can come to some strong confidence in the matter, can anyone speculate as to how this might change our overall view of evolution?
Related posts: