Recent interview with Eliot Jacobson

[accountinquestion]

Not giving an opinion on the validity of global warming or not, but just because something has broad scientific consensus does not necessarily make it true.

These are all examples of things that had broad scientific consensus in the early or mid twentieth century:

Luminous ether, eugenics, homosexuality as a mental disorder, lobotomies, cocaine as a cure all drug, health benefits of cigarettes, Thalidomide for pregnant women, DDT as a miracle chemical, craniometry, steady state universe, safety of lead in pipes gas & paint, etc. etc. etc.

You didn't have 100s or 1000s of people researching it. You didn't have a lot of things. Cavemen believed shit too. Yanno?

.

Actually I’m afraid you are incorrect about that.

Just taking for example the first 3 luminous ether, eugenics, & homosexuality as a mental disorder, there were literally thousands of people researching these, writing scientific papers about these, etc. back when these theories were popular.

Even Albert Einstein was very interested in luminous ether early in his career.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luminiferous_aether

Eugenics is likely real. Tons of stuff is hereditary. Homosexuality as a mental disorder sounds like religion or politics to me. I don't even know what Luminous ether is. I do not begin to see a meaningful analogy. There have been countless transnational meetings. When I say 1000s of people I mean in us alone.

Everyone has moved on to Hickam dictum. They can no longer argue global warming isn't real. They can't point to any other real theory as to why so much increase all at once. So this is the new thing. It is a new denialism without an expiration. We will never know because other theories exist. Amazing to me how much people mentally fight to maintain clearly wrong beliefs.