Think For Yourself

In a comment yesterday, Joe L wrote:

There appears to be a concerted effort to demonize vaping which exploded in recent weeks.

Not being a vaper, I don’t pay much attention to vaping news, so I’ll simply take his word for this. But it prompted the thought that there seems to be a concerted effort currently under way in multiple directions.

After all, we’ve been also seeing a concerted effort, with Extinction Rebellion and Greta Thunberg, to push the climate change agenda back to the centre of public attention, after languishing in the doldrums for the past few years.

At the same time, after having got nowhere with the Mueller investigation, a whole series of new attacks are being launched on Donald Trump, with shadowy “whistleblowers” emerging to accuse him of applying pressure to Ukraine to investigate Joe Biden and his son Hunter Biden’s dodgy dealings there, and Nancy Pelosi launching an “impeachment” inquiry about it. Add to that mounting rumours that Hillary Clinton is going to enter the 2020 presidential race.

And then of course there’s Brexit, with increasingly desperate attempts being made in recent weeks in the UK parliament and courts to prevent it from happening.

Add it all up, and it looks like a concerted global attempt to get the faltering globalist project back on the track. The Empire is striking back.

All these various pushes seem to have the character of propaganda wars, and to all be advancing one new lie or other:

1) E-cigarettes cause cancer.
2) We’ve only got 11 years to do something about climate change.
3) Rep. Adam Schiff seems to have simply made stuff up about what Donald Trump said to the Ukrainian president.
4) A No Deal Brexit would be a catastrophe.

It’s all scaremongering and lies.

Unless, of course, you believe it all.

And it all comes down to what you believe, or who you believe. In the past, most people believed in one religion or other. And now most people (in the developed world) believe in Science. They used to put their faith in bishops and priests, but now they put their faith in doctors and scientists and experts. And that’s just as much a belief system as any religion. It entails believing what you’re told by some authority figure.

What happens when that trust ebbs away? I never had much faith in bishops and priests, but I have increasingly little faith in doctors and scientists and experts. They all seem to be simply making stuff up, just like Adam Schiff. They’re no longer trying to discover truth, but instead to use their prestige to get people to believe them, and do what they tell them to do.

My response is (to try) to think for myself. Perhaps that’s the only possible response in a world in which trustworthy authorities have largely vanished. You’re on your own. You’ve only got your own judgement available to you.

This isn’t new. This sort of large scale loss of faith and trust happened during the Reformation circa 1500, when large numbers of Protestants started disbelieving the Pope in Rome, some even believing that he was a satanic figure. And these Protestants started thinking for themselves, and in doing so they fractured into hundreds, perhaps even thousands, of rival sects, as much at war with each other as they were with Rome. And now we’re seeing the same thing happening with the Church of Science.

In my own case, thinking for myself about climate change has resulted in me building dynamic heat flow models of ice ages – because I used to build heat flow models of buildings 40 years ago. And I’ve come up with my own new Theory Of Ice Ages (Brief outline: During glacial periods thick snow on the surface of the Earth makes the underlying socks slowly warm up over thousands of years, and eventually melt the overlying snow, after which the rocks rapidly cool down during the subsequent brief interglacial period, allowing snow to again settle on them and and repeat the cycle.) However, climate scientists seem oblivious to this idea, and so it’s a new heresy. But it’s exactly the sort of thing that one should expect to see when people stop trusting experts and start thinking for themselves. They’ll come up with their own ideas just like the Protestants in 1500 came up with their own interpretations of the Bible. So I’m a modern-day Shaker or Quaker or Ranter. And, still greater heresy, I’ve come to believe that Global Warming is a Good Thing, because it might just delay or prevent the onset of the otherwise inevitable next Ice Age. How terrible! Don’t be too surprised if I get my head chopped off, because chopping people’s heads off is the one sure way of stopping people thinking for themselves.

But I expect to see lots and lots of people thinking for themselves about not just climate change, but everything else as well. They’re going to be forced to think for themselves. And they’ll come up with all sorts of outlandish ideas. A whole forest of them is going to spring up.

But that’s how science works. Science advances when people start thinking for themselves, rather than blindly following authorities. As Feynman said: “Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts.” Isaac Newton was just thinking for himself. And so were Copernicus and Galileo and Kepler. And they were all thinking for themselves because the authoritative structure of the world in which they were living was coming apart, and they had to do their own thinking, in the exact same way that sailors who leap off a sinking ship into the sea have to do their own swimming.

About Frank Davis

smoker
This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

11 Responses to Think For Yourself

  1. garyk30 says:

    Is ‘science’ a new religion?
    We, it used to be ‘GIGO’ meant -garbage in =garbage out-; now, it seems to mean garbage in =gospel out.

  2. Algernon Struthers says:

    That would be Democrat Adam Schiff, not Republican (California 28th) which is heading towards smoke free! That’s going well for them, apart from leprosy, bubonic plague and other diseases we will never hear discussed on the BBC, Sky UK, or Channel 4. No, they talk Brexit, surely more so than is ever discussed in Parliament. Not always Brexit, they intersperse it with Climate Panic.
    I don’t particularly want to think for myself – it’s a lot of work – but faced with the barage of bs from mainstrea media, they’ve forced thinking upon me. I was a happy little socialist type minding my own business, until I realized their lies. The more I researched, the more I found. Oh, ignorance was bliss, but now I’m cursed with perception. The fault is conservative types who knew the truth all along!
    I can’t blame myself, my socialist upbringing taught me that!

  3. smokingscot says:

    Prior to the web it was a very lonely existence because I’ve always harboured a distrust of the establishment on every level.

    The blogosphere and the alternative media have allowed me access to the views of others who share my position.

    So it’s far less frustrating for me – and my gain is the establishments loss, because by knowing I’m not in a minority of one is empowering.

  4. Smoking Lamp says:

    There is indeed an extreme overreaction by the globalist controllers. In Los Angeles they are now seeking to ban vaping (they have already banned smoking in parks and at outdoor patios). “Los Angeles could ban all e-cigarettes and vaping devices” https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2019-10-08/e-cigarettes-vaping-devices-proposed-ban-los-angeles Just like ten attack on second hand smoke, the attack on vaping ignores all evidence other that pre-scripted tobacco control propaganda.

    • Joe L. says:

      Many states are in the process of banning the sale of flavored vaping liquids, and the state of Massachusetts enacted a 4-month ban on the sale of all vaping products.

      Reposting a question I posed in a response to Some French Bloke in the comments of Monday’s post regarding the recent study which supposedly links vaping to cancer in mice:

      One big question I have is, did nobody ever perform animal studies like this on fog machines? Vaping devices are basically just battery-powered fog machines with a trace of nicotine added to the fog fluid (propylene glycol). Nicotine has never been considered a carcinogen. Therefore, if vaping causes cancer, then fog machines cause cancer, too. Fog machines have been around for decades. Why was this never discovered or even feared until now that people use them in a way that resembles smoking?

      • Frank Davis says:

        I’ve never heard of studies of fog machines. I thought that they were vaporizing blocks of CO2 to create fog. Perhaps that’s just how they used to do it.

        Given that the vaping study you mentioned seemed to use oncomice that were going to develop cancer anyway, the study is worthless. It seems designed to show that after inhaling vapour, hey look, the mice developed cancer. They were going to anyway, but you don’t mention that.

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fog_machine
        A fog machine, fog generator, or smoke machine is a device that emits a dense vapor that appears similar to fog or smoke. This artificial fog is most commonly used in professional entertainment applications, but smaller, more affordable fog machines are becoming common for personal use. Fog machines can also be found in use in a variety of industrial, training, and some military applications. Typically, fog is created by vaporizing proprietary water and glycol-based or glycerin-based fluids or through the atomization of mineral oil. This fluid (often referred to colloquially as fog juice) vaporizes or atomizes inside the fog machine. Upon exiting the fog machine and mixing with cooler outside air the vapor condenses, resulting in a thick visible fog.

        Heated fog machines use either an inert gas or an electric pump to propel mineral oil, propylene glycol, or glycerin and water mixture into a heat exchanger, where the solution is vaporized.

        • Joe L. says:

          The Wikipedia article states,

          A number of studies have been published on the potential health effects presented by exposure to glycol based theatrical fogs and artificial mists.

          However, reading on, there is no mention of cancer being a health risk.

          Then why is it that this new study supposedly found a link between fog machines (i.e., vaping) and cancer? Well, I think you answered that in your comment:

          Given that the vaping study you mentioned seemed to use oncomice that were going to develop cancer anyway, the study is worthless. It seems designed to show that after inhaling vapour, hey look, the mice developed cancer. They were going to anyway, but you don’t mention that.

          It’s simply because vaping looks like smoking, so they designed this “experiment” so that the results fit nicely with their lies about smoking. Inconsistencies like this will eventually be the downfall of Tobacco Control.

No need to log in

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.