February 16, 2025

Nonscientists create a science problem in attempting to impose their stupidity onto science. I realize how insulting that phraseology is; but the problem is that serious and cannot be properly represented by soft-soaping it.

The most visible manifestation is know-nothings in journalism speaking for scientists, imposing a fraud version of science onto society and not allowing criticism of their claims. The most obvious example is "carbon free" and "on par with coal."

No human activity is carbon free, while about a hundred and fifty truckloads of concrete go under a windmill and a much greater expense is the steel which needs to be smelted with coking coal.

So electricity is being promoted to replace coking of steel, as if the electricity would be carbon free, while electricity is the most wasteful form of energy and fake renewables put more carbon dioxide into the atmosphere than coal powered electrical generators.

Of course, no good fascist is going to believe a word of that. So the first problem is that nonscientists and fraud scientists use science as a belief system, as many critics have noticed in the promotion of the greenhouse gas fraud.

The requirements in going from a belief system to science evades nonscientists. The requirement is extremely demanding. Science is designed to accomplish the task of reliably replacing erroneous assumptions with the objective realities of the universe which define life and solutions to problems; and anything that doesn't is not science.

The primary requirement for real science is to produce evidence. The evidence doesn't have to be overwhelmingly significant, or perfect or even correct. Real scientists evaluate evidence and do nothing other than that. They gradually overcome errors in that manner. But no one overcomes errors when belief systems are imposed as science.

The evidence of science is produced by extending technological procedures into new areas. Scientists need to understand technology better than engineers do. Scientists study all surrounding realities for evidence, while engineers only study mathematical processes for repetitions procedures.

Scientists educate themselves by studying published literature along with the five hundred years of evolved scientific knowledge. It's a life-long process starting with eight years of high intensity education followed with laboratory studies.

To assume nonscientists can replace that process with whims is creating a major social problem.