 |
| (Emphasis his.) |
It’s odd that in all the breathless pronouncements about the
“NASA funded study” that predicts the global collapse of modern civilization,
there is not one mention of prior bias of the researcher NASA funded. It’s odd
because it’s so devastatingly simple to uncover with a quick Google search.
 |
| (Emphasis mine.) |
Safa Motesharrei has been writing about the collapse of civilization
since at least 2011 (and likely a lot earlier, but I gathered all I needed to
know in my 10-minute search). What’s fascinating about his writing is his naked
disdain for society’s wealthy, whom he calls “free riders,” and his
totalitarian recommendations to save us all from this impending doom, including
government policies to “stabilize population,” and to “stabilize industrial
production per person.” Let the implications of those recommendations sink in.
So the real question becomes since NASA surely vetted Mr.
Motesharrei, why did that fund the research of someone with such extreme views
on government control? And if they didn't vet him, why not?
Way to post some timely investigation... I am just read this prior to reading the article and will have it in mind...
ReplyDeleteFrom an economic theory point of view, a free rider is a person that enjoys a public good but does not (fully) pay for it. So, assuming that rich people pollute by consuming and without paying for their environmental damage, they are indeed free-riders. Motesharrei is actually right! Sorry.
ReplyDeleteI'd love to agree with you, but then we'd both be wrong.
DeleteSo the researcher is consistent in his conclusions; how does that make them irrelevant?
ReplyDeleteThe Birthers, 9-11 conspiracy nuts and the Flat Earth Society are all [hold beliefs that are] "consistent with [their] conclusions" and I find them irrelevant. How about you?
Delete