Scientists Have Failed Humanity For Over 50 Years

[CalDaedalus]

Freeman Dyson is the last of the greatest 20th century physicists, a colleague of Einstein and Feynman, Professor Emeritus of Princeton’s Institute for Advanced Study, who wrote Imagined Worlds which has a chapter on ETHICS that documents the facts about why scientists have failed Humanity for over 50 years.

 

Some of the more important quotes that characterize scientific culture are:

“The main social benefit provided by pure science in esoteric fields is to serve as a welfare program for scientists and engineers.”

“The failure of science to produce benefits for the poor in recent decades is due to two factors working in combination: the pure scientists have become more detached from the mundane needs of humanity, and the applied scientist have become more attached to immediate profitability.”

The most historic warning of all is reserved for the UC National Labs, the worst case example of tenured welfare state scientific culture devoid of humanitarian motivation characterized by Dyson, is contained in President Dwight D. Eisenhower’s 1961 Farewell Address to the Nation:

"The prospect of domination of the nation's scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present – and is gravely to be regarded."

It is widely accepted that the two greatest scientific discoveries of the 20th century were relativity (Einstein) and quantum mechanics (Schrodinger et al.). Unfortunately, after WWII, there have been no discoveries anywhere near the same magnitude in physics, and no scientists anywhere near the same caliber as Einstein, Schrodinger et al.

 

It’s as if the golden age of physics discoveries died after WWII. Instead, 50 years of UC National Labs failures to produce fusion energy, fuel cells, etc. to replace the needs for oil are tragic proof of Dyson’s charges against scientist’s ethics that have failed to protect and preserve Humanity ever since WWII.

 

Failures to heed Eisenhower’s warning for over 45 years is the number one reason that we have still not replaced the need for oil, thus the reason for today’s oil wars, worldwide terrorism, and sectarian warfare that threatens to spread throughout the Middle East.

 

Thus, the greatest tragedies caused by American scientists due to their cultural failures to replace the need for oil after over 50 years of research into fusion, fuel cells, etc, are:

1) American scientists are totally unable to stop global warming, and

2) American scientists are totally unable to prevent escalating international chaos from overwhelming humanity.

 

.

[Phi for All]

Unfortunately accumulating wealth has always been among the leading motivators of all mankind for quite some time. Big science needs big funding and they are at the mercy of those who would reap the profits of genius.

 

Equally unfortunate are the facts that oil is still a profitable market venture, and war is even more so.

[RyanJ]

Unfortunately accumulating wealth has always been among the leading motivators of all mankind for quite some time. Big science needs big funding and they are at the mercy of those who would reap the profits of genius.

 

Equally unfortunate are the facts that oil is still a profitable market venture' date=' and war is even more so.[/quote']

 

So true, if it were not for war and the technological advances it demands we would not be at our level of technology...

 

One day (hopefully soon) cars will be clean

 

Cheers,

 

Ryan Jones

[CalDaedalus]

Unfortunately accumulating wealth has always been among the leading motivators of all mankind for quite some time. Big science needs big funding and they are at the mercy of those who would reap the profits of Genius.

Equally unfortunate are the facts that oil is still a profitable market venture' date=' and war is even more so.[/quote']

 

It's one thing to be philosophical and accept the end of Humanity because science is not motivated to protect and preserve Humanity, thus writing off Humanity because "accumulating wealth" (greed) is the only scientific motivator, but I have to believe there is a better way to restore the age of discovery that died before WWII, and some ethics dedicated to Humanity might help for openers.

 

"Big science" wasn't what created relativity, and "Big science" didn't create quantum mechanics, the last two greatest discoveries in the history of science, individual and collaborative gedankenexperiments made those discoveries happen.

 

But "Big science" mentality with gargantuan machinenexperiments has totally replaced gedankenexperiment creativity, so what's really killing Humanity is over 50 years of scientific failure to think individually and collaboratively anymore.

 

Watching and doing nothing, looking the other way are the prevailing scientific cultural values. It's one thing for politicians to destroy nations due to their historically dominant cultural values of corruption and greed, but it's another thing for scientists who could do better to choose to do nothing because they don't have the latest gargantuan machine to prove they still don't know what the hell is going on one trial and error failure at a time, while all of Humanity descends into more out of control poverty, disease and violence.

 

The scientific culture of denials and fingerpointing is totally unacceptable.

[bascule]

It is widely accepted that the two greatest scientific discoveries of the 20th century were relativity (Einstein) and quantum mechanics (Schrodinger et al.). Unfortunately, after WWII, there have been no discoveries anywhere near the same magnitude in physics, and no scientists anywhere near the same caliber as Einstein, Schrodinger et al.

 

I think you have a rather myopic way of looking at the situation. Quantum and relativity were both revolutions in their field which can only occur when there is ample evidence in place from which to begin the revolution (i.e. discovery of blackbody radiation, Hubble's observations of light)

 

Quantum and relativity were two complete redefinitions of how we viewed the world. Those can't happen all the time. However, I think we may very well see some revolutions in physics after the Large Hadron Collider is activated.

[ashennell]

scientists have failed Humanity for over 50 years.

 

This seems to assume that it's the role of science is to save humanity.

 

It is widely accepted that the two greatest scientific discoveries of the 20th century were relativity (Einstein) and quantum mechanics (Schrodinger et al.). Unfortunately, after WWII, there have been no discoveries anywhere near the same magnitude in physics, and no scientists anywhere near the same caliber as Einstein, Schrodinger et al.

 

This seems a bit hypocritical. Why should you be bothered about discoveries of this kind - neither of them have any great significance in sciences role of 'saving humanity.'

 

there are already replacements for many of the uses of fossil fuels. The reason they are not popular is because of money - businesses and governments.

 

WE don't need science to stop global warming we just need to change they way we live. If it wasn't for science we wouldn't even know about global warming.

 

I heard this bull many times.

[Phi for All]

It's one thing to be philosophical and accept the end of Humanity because science is not motivated to protect and preserve Humanity,

Strawman. Please point to where I accepted the end of Humanity.

thus writing off Humanity because "accumulating wealth" (greed) is the only scientific motivator,

More strawman. I said:

accumulating wealth has always been among the leading motivators

I didn't say it was the only factor. Please watch your logical fallacies. My mouth has no room for your words.

but I have to believe there is a better way to restore the age of discovery that died before WWII' date=' and some ethics dedicated to Humanity might help for openers.[/quote']Agreed.

"Big science" wasn't what created relativity, and "Big science" didn't create quantum mechanics, the last two greatest discoveries in the history of science, individual and collaborative gedankenexperiments made those discoveries happen.

OK.

But "Big science" mentality with gargantuan machinenexperiments has totally replaced gedankenexperiment creativity, so what's really killing Humanity is over 50 years of scientific failure to think individually and collaboratively anymore.

Quite generalized and oversimplified. "Fifty years of scientific failure" is Misleading Vividness, and so encompassing as to be completely meaningless. Even breaking down individual scientific failures I fail to why I should believe any single thing could be the root cause.

 

The rest of your post is very reactionary, which I don't mind really, but again paints all of science with a very wide brush. Seemingly collective mind sets and conspiracies are easy targets for our outrage but practical application and surgical problem-solving beats a good rant any day. And perhaps the days of small labs making big discoveries has simply passed, and as Bascule points out, the supercolliders may break up enough "Big Science" so the little guys can reclaim their own scientific territory again.

[CalDaedalus]

Strawman. ---------.

 

You folks can marginalize, deny and obfusate all you wish, which is the way scientists apparently choose to deal with the facts of life devolving around them outside their labs, but the bottom line is that science hasn't replaced the need for oil after over 50 years of failures.

 

The worst case scenario case study is Teller's LLNL toy that he founded over 50 years ago to create fusion energy sources, in addition to his Dr. Strangelove bomb preoccupation. Still nothing today from any of the UC National Labs, not even fuel cells, except for FBI raids because of never-ending criminal negligence, lab mismanagement and corruption by the Board of Regents and UC executives throughout the UC system itself.

 

The only benefit so far, is that all the professors dedicated themselves to the most notorious tenured welfare state in history.

[Xyph]

... Thus' date=' the greatest tragedies caused by American scientists due to their cultural failures to replace the need for oil after over 50 years of research into fusion, fuel cells, etc, are:

1) American scientists are totally unable to stop global warming, and

2) American scientists are totally unable to prevent escalating international chaos from overwhelming humanity.[/quote']It's not up to science to provide the technology to allow humanity to do whatever they want without consequences - it's up to humanity to be responsible about their use of the technology that is available.

 

Your so called "greatest tragedies" are pretty ridiculous examples. We don't need any revolutionary technologies to solve the problems you've listed. We have the ability to do it now. The obvious solutions to the problems you've listed would be:

1) Impose strict regulations on all polluting activities, regardless of economic impact, and enforce them ruthlessly.

2) Regulate breeding, regardless of economic or societal impact. (Assuming this "tragedy" refers to overpopulation... It's not phrased entirely clearly.)

 

Even if science did come up with technological solutions, similar problems would recur if humanity was continually reliant on science for new innovations to support itself. Whenever science couldn't keep up, society would be in danger of collapse. What's needed is not a scientific revolution, but a political one, and it is the current political climate that has failed humanity for the last 50 years, not science.

[CalDaedalus]

---

 

You are still in the denial, fingerpointing and obfuscation stage.

 

It science produced fusion generation that UC National Labs started working on over 50 years ago instead of dedicating themselves to tenured welfare state, we wouldn't have to consider actions you like those you suggest.

 

But UC hasn't even come up with feasible fuel cells, so Humanity is screwed, because your suggestions will never get the job done as long as we depend on oil.

[insane_alien]

just cause were taking more than 50 years to make a viable fusion process isn't a failure of science. Its a hard problem to get a fusing plasma travelling round a toroid stably. heck just look at a http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stellarator .

There is also the problem of plasmas at millions of kelvin and million amp currents. its not simple like you seem to think of it as.

[Xyph]

You are still in the denial' date=' fingerpointing and obfuscation stage.

 

It science produced fusion generation that UC National Labs started working on over 50 years ago instead of dedicating themselves to tenured welfare state, we wouldn't have to consider actions you like those you suggest.

 

But UC hasn't even come up with feasible fuel cells, so Humanity is screwed, because your suggestions will never get the job done as long as we depend on oil.[/quote']My suggestions would get the job done even if science never came up with an alternative to oil for the masses.

 

If oil use is subject to uncompromising regulation, even to the point of outright prohibition in all polluting applications, what part of global warming, exactly, would remain a problem?

 

Could you explain why you think this problem is the responsibility of science to solve, rather than, say, those who have the power to enforce such regulations, yet continuously ignore scientific recommendations?

[CalDaedalus]

just cause were taking more than 50 years to make a viable fusion process isn't a failure of science. Its a hard problem to get a fusing plasma travelling round a toroid stably. heck just look at a http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stellarator .

There is also the problem of plasmas at millions of kelvin and million amp currents. its not simple like you seem to think of it as.

This comment is a perfect example of the denials that brought scientific discovery to a halt after WWII.

 

You can say repeat a "million" for every parameter as much as you wish, but the fact is that scientists no longer think like Einstein, Schrodinger et al. anymore, scientists just want lifetime welfare playing with supermachines without ever having to discover anything again.

[CalDaedalus]

My suggestions would get the job done even if science never came up with an alternative to oil for the masses.

If oil use is subject to uncompromising regulation' date=' even to the point of outright prohibition in all polluting applications, what part of global warming, exactly, would remain a problem?

Could you explain why you think this problem is the responsibility of science to solve, rather than, say, those who have the power to enforce such regulations, yet continuously ignore scientific recommendations?[/quote']

 

As long culturally corrupt and greedy politicians are calling the shots, then your suggestions shall never happen.

[BhavinB]

This comment is a perfect example of the denials that brought scientific discovery to a halt after WWII.

 

You can say repeat a "million" for every parameter as much as you wish' date=' but the fact is that scientists no longer think like Einstein, Schrodinger et al. anymore, scientists just want lifetime welfare playing with supermachines without ever having to discover anything again.[/quote']

 

This is hilarious. Any argument we make is considered 'denial'. You have created a system where by only you are correct and there are no other possibilities. Anyone who is not with you on the topic is in some 'denial' or 'obfuscation' phase.

 

Oh please. You're not here to debate, you're just here to spout your rhetoric because it is YOU who fails to see how science has benefited humanity. Perhaps if you even looked at FACTS on human life spans over the last 500 years, or maybe the infant mortality rates, or average standard of living, you'd have some other criteria for determining science's involvement in humanity.

 

No but ofcourse I'm in denial and obfuscating like crazy.

 

And go read up on fusion yourself...its not ONE lab trying to get it. There are hundreds of people researching in it. If there were one group who failed humanity, someone else would have picked up the slack so they can get the glory. That's how the scientific community is.

[Phi for All]

the bottom line is that science hasn't replaced the need for oil after over 50 years of failures.

Experimentation is mostly failures. That is it's nature. Success naturally means the experiments can taper off a bit. And the reason oil hasn't been replaced is because it's still a viable, profitable market. Just because you and I hate being dependent on it (and beleive me, we are not alone) doesn't mean it isn't driving the market for some people.

This comment is a perfect example of the denials that brought scientific discovery to a halt after WWII.

I should angrily list all the scientific advancement that's happened since WWII but I absolutely refuse to let myself get crabby over your absurdities. It's the beginning of the weekend, afterall, and why am I working in my comfy welfare state lab if not to enjoy my weekends?

 

I appreciate your fervor in this, I really do. It's passionate people like yourself who will drive politics and science to a better place. But unless you focus your approach and speak to specific points without hasty generalizations, flawed logic and conspiratorial zealotry, you are going to drive away many people who may share your objectives.

[JonM]

how about we kill a bunch of lizards, bury them in our back yard and wait 300 million years?

 

 

also what about nanotechnology? might that promise a solution?

[bascule]

You folks can marginalize, deny and obfusate all you wish, which is the way scientists apparently choose to deal with the facts of life devolving around them outside their labs, but the bottom line is that science hasn't replaced the need for oil after over 50 years of failures.

 

It's not that the solutions aren't out there. It's that market forces prevent them from being utilized. Switching away from oil represents a major infrastructural change, and nobody is certain in what direction the infrastructure is going to move exactly, although it's looking more and more like biofuels will provide the solution.

[CalDaedalus]

---I appreciate your fervor in this, I really do. It's passionate people like yourself who will drive politics and science to a better place.---

Thanks for the thought PfA, it's really pretty hopeless at this point considering the over 50 years of failures by the UC National Labs and the University of California professors, executives, and regents to accomplish anything more for Humanity than prove Dyson and Eisenhower right as I noted in my Post #1.

 

While I was at Cal I heard a lot of preaching about Ethics for Humanity, which I have chosen to live by, but since graduation I have read far too many news reports on the failures to practice ethics by the University of California that I have become ashamed to admit I have anything to do with them because they are too criminally corrupt to deal with anymore.

[CalDaedalus]

Former San Diego Congressman Duke Cunningham was sentenced to over eight years in prison on Friday for the worst corruption that has ever been found. What most people don't realize is that Duke Cunningham and University of California President and physicist Robert Dynes are both former San Diego residents who achieved fame while living here, but few people realize that they, their colleagues and institutions they serve(d) have one most important shared failure.

 

The fact is that UC President Robert Dynes and his colleagues at the University of California have failed Humanity about as much as Duke Cunningham and his colleagues in Washington DC have betrayed American Democracy, and what they all have in common is their shared responsibility for the worst case failure by the UC National Labs.

 

For over 50 years the UC National Labs have proved the wisdom of President Dwight D. Eisenhower’s 1961 Farewell Address to the Nation:

"The prospect of domination of the nation's scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present – and is gravely to be regarded."

Failures to heed and act on Ike’s "grave" warning for 45 years have taken us to the point where America is now involved in warfare, worldwide terrorism and increasingly aggressive international competition for oil because of the fact that for over 50 years the University of California has been performing hydrogen based energy research at Edward Teller’s LLNL and other UC National Labs which have continuously failed to discover new energy sources to eliminate the needs for oil and other fossil fuels, the “grave” consequences of which are now threatening the very existence of Humanity. And the main reason for UC National Labs failures were ethics, again as documented by Freeman Dyson in Imagined Worlds:

“The main social benefit provided by pure science in esoteric fields is to serve as a welfare program for scientists and engineers.”

Both Cunningham and Dynes also share the worst qualities of the institutions they serve including avarice, elitism, and arrogant marginalization of We The People as well as Humanity. So today we are all paying the hellacious price for the common failure of both institutions, with the worst cast consequences of increasingly out of control poverty, disease and violence in America and around the world.

 

Those are high prices to pay for watching and doing nothing while We allowed our public officials to refuse to accept responsibility and accountability for their failures, until Friday for Duke that is. Now someone needs to hold President Dynes and his bunch accountable for their failures to Humanity.

[Xavier]

It’s as if the golden age of hairdressing discoveries died after WWII. Instead, 50 years of Hoboken Hair Sylists Institute failures to produce fusion energy, fuel cells, etc. to replace the needs for oil are tragic proof of Dyson’s charges against scientist’s ethics that have failed to protect and preserve Humanity ever since WWII.

 

Failures to heed Eisenhower’s warning for over 45 years is the number one reason that we have still not replaced the need for oil, thus the reason for today’s oil wars, worldwide terrorism, and sectarian warfare that threatens to spread throughout the Middle East.

 

Thus, the greatest tragedies caused by American hairdressers due to their cultural failures to replace the need for oil after over 50 years of research into fusion, fuel cells, etc, are:

1) American hairdressers are totally unable to stop global warming, and

2) American hairdressers are totally unable to prevent escalating international chaos from overwhelming humanity.

[mattbimbo]

i wonder if the failures you speak of go beyond scientists. politicians have been failing humanity for ages. in the world of politics it is short-term policies, hyperbole, managerial inexperience, poor regulation, uncritical electorate, etc that undo any chances of good governmental practice.

i find the same is true in science, despite many good intentions.

and of course, the failures are even more striking when scientists and politicians are supposed to work together.

[gcol]

If we were all baldies, how do you suggest redundant hairdressers should be retrained?

[Tom Mattson]

This comment is a perfect example of the denials that brought scientific discovery to a halt after WWII.

 

You can say repeat a "million" for every parameter as much as you wish' date=' but the fact is that scientists no longer think like Einstein, Schrodinger et al. anymore, scientists just want lifetime welfare playing with supermachines without ever having to discover anything again.[/quote']

 

Your conclusion is not in any way supported by the historical record. The ideas that were developed by Einstein, Schrodinger, et al supplanted Newton's physics, which held court for nearly 3 centuries. That's how long it took for someone to discover the flaws in classical dynamics. Now you complain that it's taking 50 years for the next revolution? What on Earth would lead you to believe that it should happen that fast? Since it obviously isn't the historical record, it must be some personal reason. But surely you wouldn't suggest that the scientific community start doing things differently because of one person's fancy, would you?

[CalDaedalus]

Your conclusion is not in any way supported by the historical record. The ideas that were developed by Einstein, Schrodinger, et al supplanted Newton's physics, which held court for nearly 3 centuries[/i']. That's how long it took for someone to discover the flaws in classical dynamics. Now you complain that it's taking 50 years for the next revolution? What on Earth would lead you to believe that it should happen that fast? Since it obviously isn't the historical record, it must be some personal reason. But surely you wouldn't suggest that the scientific community start doing things differently because of one person's fancy, would you?

Congratulations Tom, you just won the Award for Best Denial of The Day, so far. Plus an Obfuscation cluster.

 

The truth is, if you get a PhD and work for UC National Labs, you might as well take your PhD and roll it onto a roll of toilet paper, because that will be the most useful thing you will do with it as long as you are on welfare with UC National Labs.

 

Again, what I am saying is that scientists must work together in a collaboration of academic institutions to achieve anything, that's what they did to create Quantum Mechanics.