Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Sunday September 09 2018, @12:29PM   Printer-friendly
from the Better-right-than-dead dept.

A Princeton geologist has endured decades of ridicule for arguing that the fifth extinction was caused not by an asteroid but by a series of colossal volcanic eruptions.

Interesting info about science, history, death, un-scientific feeds and the value of persistence.

Here's an excerpt from https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2018/09/dinosaur-extinction-debate/565769/:

While the majority of her peers embraced the Chicxulub asteroid as the cause of the extinction, Keller remained a maligned and, until recently, lonely voice contesting it. She argues that the mass extinction was caused not by a wrong-place-wrong-time asteroid collision but by a series of colossal volcanic eruptions in a part of western India known as the Deccan Traps—a theory that was first proposed in 1978 and then abandoned by all but a small number of scientists. Her research, undertaken with specialists around the world and featured in leading scientific journals, has forced other scientists to take a second look at their data. "Gerta uncovered many things through the years that just don't sit with the nice, simple impact story that Alvarez put together," Andrew Kerr, a geochemist at Cardiff University, told me. "She's made people think about a previously near-uniformly accepted model."

Keller's resistance has put her at the core of one of the most rancorous and longest-running controversies in science. "It's like the Thirty Years' War," says Kirk Johnson, the director of the Smithsonian's National Museum of Natural History. Impacters' case-closed confidence belies decades of vicious infighting, with the two sides trading accusations of slander, sabotage, threats, discrimination, spurious data, and attempts to torpedo careers. "I've never come across anything that's been so acrimonious," Kerr says. "I'm almost speechless because of it." Keller keeps a running list of insults that other scientists have hurled at her, either behind her back or to her face. She says she's been called a "bitch" and "the most dangerous woman in the world," who "should be stoned and burned at the stake."

[...] "It has all the aspects of a really nice story," Keller says of the asteroid theory. "It's just not true." (Cole Wilson)

This dispute illuminates the messy way that science progresses, and how this idealized process, ostensibly guided by objective reason and the search for truth, is shaped by ego, power, and politics. Keller has had to endure decades of ridicule to make scientists reconsider an idea they had confidently rejected. "Gerta had to fight very much to get into the position that she is in right now," says Wolfgang Stinnesbeck, a collaborator of Keller's from Heidelberg University. "It's thanks to her that the case is not closed."

Background:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerta_Keller


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 1, Flamebait) by AthanasiusKircher on Monday September 10 2018, @12:55PM (3 children)

    by AthanasiusKircher (5291) on Monday September 10 2018, @12:55PM (#732737) Journal

    I read that, I went to verify it, I obviously saw that you lied. You must think your readers are incredibly stupid.

    Here's the post [soylentnews.org]. Here's what it said:

    I don't even have a position on AGW aside from an innate distrust for any scientific position defended primarily by people who know nothing about it except "a bunch of nerds agree with me, so my side's right and you're literally Hitler".

    Right there Mr. Buzzard refers to "an innate distrust for any scientific position defended..." and coupled with "aside from..." mentioned right after AGW, the logical implication is "I have an innate distrust for AGW since it is primarily defended..." I also admit to have read "a bunch of nerds agree" to mean people who actually know about climate science (since that group is implicitly contrasted with the speakers who are assumed to be ignorant).

    Anyhow, you can take the rational stance that Mr. Buzzard was obviously making a reference to AGW at the outset, which he has done in other posts here as well. Or you can act like an idiot and play semantics and try to get out of clear implications.

    I don't really care. What you, sir, have proven yourself to be is a TROLL. And an ass.

    Therefore, Mr. Arik, I say farewell. I shall not reply to your posts again. I believe feeding the trolls does much, much more harm to this site, and despite your occasional moments of lucidity, you have proven you are willing to be an ass and to deny common sense to try to make a point.

    I've always disliked your crimes against typography, but I shall support them no longer. Goodbye, Mr. Arik. It's been weird!

    Cheers!

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   -1  
       Flamebait=1, Troll=1, Informative=1, Total=3
    Extra 'Flamebait' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   1  
  • (Score: 1, Troll) by VLM on Monday September 10 2018, @01:03PM (2 children)

    by VLM (445) Subscriber Badge on Monday September 10 2018, @01:03PM (#732742)

    I also admit to have read "a bunch of nerds agree" to mean people who actually know about climate science

    That's much more realistically people who watch "The Late Show With Stephen Colbert" or non-STEM academics. I find it very damning that the most strident true believers in AGW with the most intense propaganda are, like, sociology professors.

    Surely, if the worlds plumbers, arborists, and dentists united in an intense devout religious like belief in P = NP including suppression of heretics, that would be a VERY strong signal that in reality P != NP. Sometimes a blind dog finds a bone, but anti-social behavior is usually correlated with being wrong, so its very unlikely they're correct.

    With a side dish of lying about the topic. In public AGW means scientific stuff about temperatures rising. In private the solutions are always scientifically insignificant but always very effective at being hyper corrupt. "I believe in F=m*a and therefore you should rob a bank and gimme da money, what do you mean you don't wanna do that you must be a DENIER? burn that heretic at the stake what kind of moron doesn't believe in F=m*a now gimme 'my' money! ! ! !"

    • (Score: 2) by AthanasiusKircher on Monday September 10 2018, @05:29PM (1 child)

      by AthanasiusKircher (5291) on Monday September 10 2018, @05:29PM (#732830) Journal

      You know what, I'm done. I'm tired of replying to inane crap like this. I don't really care what Mr. Buzzard originally said precisely -- it's clear what the troll meant. It's clear what the troll who replied to the troll meant.

      And Mr. VLM (who also sometimes plays the troll role), the whole point of this thread is that a large number of actual experts who understand this stuff accept the findings that climate change is happened.

      I'm all for rationally debating with people I disagree with. In fact, I really enjoy it. But I've realized in recent weeks that's not happening here anymore. I either post something informative (and usually it leads to no further discussion), or I get into an argument with someone who shouts back illogical non sequiturs or starts arguing around stuff rather than addressing any legitimate points of contention. I'm a firm believer in rational discourse, and that's no longer possible here (if it ever was... perhaps my hopes were just aspirational).

      So, I'm done. I'm logging out of Soylent News.

      Bye everyone. I'm tired of this shit. I might think about logging in again in a few weeks (or maybe post a final journal to explain why I'm leaving), but I think I'm done for good.

      Cheers to all. I wish most of you well, even the trolls. I'm just not in it for the lulz, and I don't want to be somewhere where a large number of prominent folks are in it for the lulz. Just not my thing.

      • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 10 2018, @06:08PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 10 2018, @06:08PM (#732854)

        Yep, maybe now you understand some of the ACs like myself who have flagged some of the shit users who troll and are just plain stupid and we no longer go for discourse and just hop straight to ad-hominems. No point wasting your time and legitimate effort.