Yeah it’s a summary work that draws on decades of research. Both of these authors are extremely well-published in their respective fields. I’m like a third of the way through Dawn of Everything and it’s just as academic as “Debt” was, and neither are mass-market pulp. But work like this always draws hit pieces because it’s a way for critics to get their name out there.

Check out “The Dawn of Everything” by Wengrow and Graeber

The Bush administration pioneered the theory of the unitary executive, which is the idea that the president can do anything because he is the president. They’re the ones who kicked over the guardrails, they just did it in the context of an endless war that they started. For more on this I recommend Sheldon Wolin’s work.

Not this one. Environmental scientists end up cleaning up after them.

deleted by creator

Scientist here. I encourage everyone to use a shadow library like Scihub to break the stranglehold that Elsevier and Wiley have on the free availability of knowledge. These are financialized corporations that add nothing to society and leach off of scientists’ hard work.

A schwarschild radius of 0.5 meters corresponds to about 56 Earth masses. So Richard must have accreted a bunch of mass before he collapsed.

I think it’s the degree of bullshit that increases gradually. To speak from experience, when you are a grad student you get a feeling like there’s corruption but overall your project seems like it’s important and making a real contribution (hopefully). You also don’t have to worry about where the money is coming from. Sometimes the grant as a whole is total bullshit but there is enough discretionary spending included that great science comes out of it. But you don’t realize this until you’re writing grants, and by then you’re maybe too deep in the game to pull out. Essentially, you end up becoming a manager once you get tenure. There is no epiphany; it’s more like a slow creep.

There is no alternative if you actually want to do science and don’t have millions of dollars to buy labs and materials and instruments. Science gets done in spite of everything she is describing.

Sometimes. Sometimes it’s an intro sentence that already has 2 citations and just needs a 3rd, and you just find a paper with more measurements and the same conclusions.

Yeah see here you go. Response to “meat is bad” is “meat is fucking awesome.”

Evidence for meat is bad: I mean just drive by a factory farm. Look at any of the standard practices of the industry. Objectively horrific by any standard.

Evidence for meat is awesome: bro check out this sick bacon weave. Guy Fieri. Etc. all of it divorced completely from the process, and acknowledging meat only as an industrial product that comes packaged as a block or cylinder.

It’s an absurd argument. Nobody is arguing that meat isn’t delicious. We’re saying that everything about its production is awful.

I love how people try to make this some kind of cultural issue about picking restaurants or providing options. Anybody who spends 5 minutes looking into the industry will realize it goes against basic human decency.

This is literally what happens when a volcano erupts. Magma solidifes at the top and creates a plug, which builds pressure until it explodes.