There are excellent reasons to challenge science, and we should beware that claims about a “war on science” is part of a media plan of by which bad science is being promoted by vested interests.
In1967, the Sugar Research Foundation (now the Sugar Association) paid Harvard scientists to publish research downplaying sugar’s link to heart disease, shifting the blame onto saturated fats instead (Revealed in a 2016 JAMA Internal Medicine study). Claim: Sugar is a “safe” source of calories and energy. Reality now: High sugar consumption is linked to obesity, type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular disease, and fatty liver disease.
Trans fats (mainly from partially hydrogenated oils) were praised as “better than animal fats” like butter or lard. Margarine, packed with trans fats, was marketed as a heart-healthy food because it had no cholesterol (cholesterol was heavily demonized then). Claim: “Vegetable shortening is a modern, wholesome food product, superior to animal fats in healthfulness.” (from early Crisco advertising, based on contemporary nutrition thinking.) So screw you science. Get your f’cking house in order.
No.
You can still have a profit motive with boundaries.
You only have to look at the difference between the US and Chinese fiscal systems.
China is racing ahead, whilst Trump’s head in 25 years behind the time.
China is growing because it has adequate boundaries.
The US is failing because of pressure put in the system by the rich to de-regulate. Crypo is an example of that failure.
Crypto is undermining the US dollar by offering an alternative store of value, enabling cross-border transactions without using traditional dollar-based systems, and creating new decentralized financial infrastructure that bypasses US banks and Wall Street.
It also allows countries and individuals to resist US sanctions by moving money freely outside the reach of the US government.
Meanwhile China is pushing a centralized digital yuan to strengthen its control and influence, crypto is decentralized and harder to regulate, posing a bigger challenge to the US because it weakens the dollar’s role as the world’s dominant currency. Over time, as more people and countries use crypto for trade, savings, and financial services, it could erode global dependence on the dollar without directly replacing it.
China, by cracking down on Crypto is protecting the stability of its wealth and value for all its citizens while the US is fracturing the basis of its own stability.
I’m not entirely sure about that, technically speaking. In any system whether or not the system itself idealizes or values profit motive, there will still exist individuals and groups who DO idealize and value profit motive and those individuals/groups will do what they do, including corrupt practices to get what they want. However, in a society that has its highest ideal as profit motive (this is at least true today for economic sectors, I doubt it applies to ALL sectors of life) you will certainly get corruptions as noted, these will always occur, but you will also get a potentiation of honest hard-working people who want to better their situation within honest means and within the confines of the law. For whatever reason, maybe they are uncreative or afraid of punishment, maybe they are religious or very group selected and conscientious, or maybe they are very ethical people. But by uplifting profit motive as a value you give EVERYONE (potentially) the ability to better their situation, through whatever means they personally will choose.
This is why I think a society that lifts up the value of profit motive, should and MUST also have very strong protections in place against forms of theft, fraud, corruption and abuse. On all levels. But these controls ought not overly impose upon honest, law-abiding people to go about their personal business and economic activities freely.
Science is a prostitute supported by power. Whoever pays calls the shots. Power is a system of prohibitions, followed by temporary allowances, all in favor of those who established the prohibitions. This is why science does not tolerate new knowledge that is necessary for people. It fights against it. When it loses a battle, it appropriates it. However, in most cases, it kills those who try to bring knowledge to the people. Is this what you wanted to hear?
Animal fats are also trans fats. It is partially hydrogenated oils themselves that are unhealthy, they have a different chemical composition
Your belief is “crypto” of all things is causing American weakness? What is obvious is the real reason of American weakness is societal division and lack of manufacturing. Many americans do not create tangible items directly while China provides a lot of value, even if many of their items are junk. There are american manufacturing plants and factories here and there but nothing on the scale of China yet.
For example many americans want to be STEM while having no interest in engineering or building anything mechanically and just want to talk about STEM conceptually and do theories and math. There is not much push for creating tangible and real things in America.
US dollar hegemony just allows America to bully around smaller countries to do what they want and not addressing the underlying issue of America being self insufficient.
Additionally China utilizes a lot of underpaid labor and lack of worker rights. America does not have a robot infrastructure to compete with that yet. Chinese products also tend to have less government regulation, while if you want to launch an American business there is much more paperwork to do and government overreach. Finally one of the biggest things that is defeating American business is shipping fees, China shipping is heavily subsidized and you can get free shipping from China easily while in America you usually have to pay upwards of 5 dollars for even small parts.
Do you know any scientists who don’t need money for research? Name the scientists who haven’t received money from those in power. So don’t try to argue based on belief.
Newton was a member of the Royal Society, which financed research and projects of scientists at that time. His position as the Warden of the Royal Mint: In 1696, Newton was appointed to a high government position at the Royal Mint, where he worked on reforming the monetary system. This position provided him with a stable income, which could be used to fund his research.
NO.
Newton did all his best work whilst on lock-down, due to the Black Death before he was a member of the Royal Society, and decades before they made him master of Trinity or the Royal Mint.
He received ZERO funding, and most of his work was not even related to any thing remotely monetisable.
He was awarded membership of the Royal Society for his work on Light and Colour. He receive no cash for that and it never earned him a penny.
Moreover Newton had to pay a fee of £2 , and an annual mamberhsip fee of £1 .
So, as I said you are ignorant. Even when you run along like a little bitch and look it up, you still get it wrong.
You are a waste of oxygen.
Your claim that Newton received no funding and did all his work during the Black Death lockdown without financial support is inaccurate.
Trinity College Scholarship: Newton received a scholarship in 1664, which supported his living and research while at Cambridge. This allowed him to work without needing additional funding, and it was a key source of income during his early years.
Pre-Plague Work: Many of Newton’s works in mathematics and optics were done during this time when he was supported by the scholarship, even if they weren’t directly monetizable.
No Direct Earnings, but…: After joining the Royal Society in 1672, Newton didn’t receive direct monetary rewards for his work on light and color. However, his membership was a prestigious recognition of his research, and his work was well-respected.
Other Income Sources: In 1696, Newton was appointed Warden of the Royal Mint, a paid position that provided him financial stability, allowing him to continue his scientific endeavors.
So, your statement that Newton worked without funding overlooks the scholarship, his other sources of income, and his ability to work without financial constraints thanks to Cambridge’s support.
I expected more. Let’s take the example of selflessness in science — Giordano Bruno. This creature died at the stake, unable to understand that all motion is relative, and any point of reference can be chosen from what exists. The church didn’t care about his theories, but having offended the church itself, he couldn’t escape punishment. That’s why this fool perished. However, nothing has changed. The same fools today don’t get the joke that the Universe revolves around the Demon’s nose. Though this is easy to prove. The nose is present, and the Universe is in motion too. Relativity allows us to choose anything that exists as the point of reference. What can you do? Time has passed, but the fool remains a fool. DNA cannot be changed.