On universities campuses, it seems politics rules the day. This has always been the case, but more so on actual politics of current events. This has changed and has even recently accelerated. Science seems to be more about political science, than science – even cultish in its behavior.
This agenda-based science is seen by some as progressive, not political – others would disagree. Having the wrong ideas on campus can get a professor fired or a student suspended. New ideas are not necessarily a bad thing, so long is it is done in a “truly” scientific method. This first made its way into the humanities, questioning past ideals in philosophy and history – eliminating some and rewriting others to fit an agenda. But it has now made its way into STEM subjects as well. Is science under attack?
A pilar in science today is Darwinian evolution (please no definitional wars). Some have advocated that in order to save humanity we must kill god – old beliefs are stopping the progression of humans. Progression specifically in science, to face the growing challenges we see in the world today.
The newest and most growing religion is no religion (atheism). In the developed countries atheism is around 25%, though many that have faith in a god are essentially atheistic as well. However, the world has developed in amazing ways toward modernity under a Judeo-Christian world. So no, a Judeo-Christian world has not stopped scientific progression – it has a fairly good track record.
In fact, it might be the other way around. Aggressive Atheism abounds and can be predatory – for our own good of course. Aggressive Atheism and agenda-based science often have similar characteristics as a cult. For example:
- A group that displays an excessively zealous and unquestioning commitment to its leader – Darwin and all his new age followers.
- Questioning, doubt, and dissent are discouraged, shammed or even punished – defunded, de-platformed and ridiculed in media.
- The group is elitist, claiming a special, exalted status for itself – you must be degreed coming from the “right” schools and associations to be heard.
- The group has a polarized, us-versus-them mentality – e.g. climate change deniers, Christians are cults, not us.
- The group is preoccupied with bringing in new members – university indoctrination with a one solution framing.
- The group is preoccupied with making money – in search of the publically funded grant.
- Members are encouraged or required to live and/or socialize (avoid meaningful debate) only with other group members – ban religion from schools.
- Members fear reprisals to themselves or others if they leave – students fear to state alternative views.
Have you ever stumbled into a comment section of some post on the topic of climate change, evolution or gender studies? Yes, you get the religious cultish nut cases, but the emotions and personal attacks coming from supposed educated science folks are cultish in some of the vial comment sections. It is rather paradoxically remarkable. “You’re an idiot,” “you’re uneducated,” and “just Google it (or with some generic link)” are mainstay debate tactics. Are we now going to start doing science on YouTube and peer-reviewed on Twitter? Why not, even the peer-review process is under scrutiny.
For centuries people did not know what was on the other side of the oceans – sea monsters? Rickety ships that strayed too far from the old world were lost, giving rise to these myths. Early scientists began to understand that in fact the word was a sphere and these myths were false. At first, people did not believe for sure. So how to get people to believe? Start a shaming and banning marketing campaign?
It was when ships began to sail out around the world and bring back evidence for public consumption people started to believe and later became fact. So if there is a significant debate on a topic and one feels the need to shame and ban to force belief, one has simply has not provided enough evidence. Or they are participating in an agenda-based science cult. For example, when was the last time you have done an Abiogenesis experiment in a High School Biology class? Yet many believe this to be a proven fact. Scientists need to stop being lazy and do your job!
News Forecasters are not experts in science, though we can smell when something is not right – i.e. human nature sticks its ugly feet into the mix. We have no position on these subjects but do recognize that there are people, smarter than we, that do have legitimate questions.
Here are a couple of examples. Renowned writer and Yale University professor David Gelernter has turned away from Charles Darwin‘s theory of evolution, arguing that it has too many holes and has aged out as a probable scientific theory (a long video on this subject but very much worth the time to watch). In terms of climate change, here is a website that posts many views on the topic, both pro and con from a variety of experts. And please, stop using the term “climate change deniers,” it is a red flag to cultish behavior. No one is denying climate change, rather the causes, the degree humans have effected it and/or what is an effective response.
Perhaps debatable but to News Forecasters, we see innovation (e.g. patents) slowing, partly due to perhaps that low hanging fruit innovation has already been picked – but this presumes that humans have reached a limit. We went to the moon in the 60s, made first mobile calls in the 70s, played video games in the 80s and posted on social media boards in the 90s. What has science done lately to change our lives?
Life-changing innovations over the last 50 years have not been as impressive compared to the previous generation (i.e. flight, radio, electricity, etc …). Most of the new recent innovations have been adaptive in nature, since the start of the IT revolution – though there have been (perhaps will be) interesting breakthroughs in medicine and other areas. So why the slowdown – have humans run out of ideas or reached a complexity limitation? Where is science?
There are probably many reasons for an innovation slowdown. Economic structures (business monopolies and socialistic governments) not favoring the small innovative entrepreneur, lower R&D government budgets for basic research, stricter government regulations – just to name a few.
News Forecasters believes that a large contributor to this is that science has an increasingly “closed-mind.” This has been brought on by this restrictive cultish behavior in agenda-based science – political agenda-driven science in academia and monopolistic containment of innovation for profit in private businesses. News Forecasters, unfortunately, believes that this innovation slowdown is the trend. More on this subject another time, but let’s hope innovation doesn’t stop or even regress.
A video presentation of this subject: