Conspiracy theories attempt to explain events as the secretive plots of powerful people. While conspiracy theories are not typically supported by evidence,
this doesn’t stop them from blossoming. Conspiracy theories damage society in a number of ways. /1 (THREAD) #TTP
More from For later read
Daily Bookmarks to GAVNet 02/12/2021
Quantum causal loops
https://t.co/emX8OxKPl0
#loops #quantum
Large-scale commodity farming accelerating climate change in the Amazon
https://t.co/v3gA7OTP9E
#ClimateChange #forest #farm
Collapsed glaciers increase Third Pole uncertainties: Downstream lakes may merge within a decade
https://t.co/huAma56KeB
#glacier #lakes #ClimateChange
From trash to treasure: Silicon waste finds new use in Li-ion batteries
https://t.co/TkxKFDQMC6
#batteries #treasure #silicon #trash
Quantum causal loops
https://t.co/emX8OxKPl0
#loops #quantum
Large-scale commodity farming accelerating climate change in the Amazon
https://t.co/v3gA7OTP9E
#ClimateChange #forest #farm
Collapsed glaciers increase Third Pole uncertainties: Downstream lakes may merge within a decade
https://t.co/huAma56KeB
#glacier #lakes #ClimateChange
From trash to treasure: Silicon waste finds new use in Li-ion batteries
https://t.co/TkxKFDQMC6
#batteries #treasure #silicon #trash
You May Also Like
This is a pretty valiant attempt to defend the "Feminist Glaciology" article, which says conventional wisdom is wrong, and this is a solid piece of scholarship. I'll beg to differ, because I think Jeffery, here, is confusing scholarship with "saying things that seem right".
The article is, at heart, deeply weird, even essentialist. Here, for example, is the claim that proposing climate engineering is a "man" thing. Also a "man" thing: attempting to get distance from a topic, approaching it in a disinterested fashion.
Also a "man" thing—physical courage. (I guess, not quite: physical courage "co-constitutes" masculinist glaciology along with nationalism and colonialism.)
There's criticism of a New York Times article that talks about glaciology adventures, which makes a similar point.
At the heart of this chunk is the claim that glaciology excludes women because of a narrative of scientific objectivity and physical adventure. This is a strong claim! It's not enough to say, hey, sure, sounds good. Is it true?
Imagine for a moment the most obscurantist, jargon-filled, po-mo article the politically correct academy might produce. Pure SJW nonsense. Got it? Chances are you're imagining something like the infamous "Feminist Glaciology" article from a few years back.https://t.co/NRaWNREBvR pic.twitter.com/qtSFBYY80S
— Jeffrey Sachs (@JeffreyASachs) October 13, 2018
The article is, at heart, deeply weird, even essentialist. Here, for example, is the claim that proposing climate engineering is a "man" thing. Also a "man" thing: attempting to get distance from a topic, approaching it in a disinterested fashion.
Also a "man" thing—physical courage. (I guess, not quite: physical courage "co-constitutes" masculinist glaciology along with nationalism and colonialism.)
There's criticism of a New York Times article that talks about glaciology adventures, which makes a similar point.
At the heart of this chunk is the claim that glaciology excludes women because of a narrative of scientific objectivity and physical adventure. This is a strong claim! It's not enough to say, hey, sure, sounds good. Is it true?