5 ms·

> I’m constantly surprised at how much of an anti-science, anti-technology undercurrent there is on HN. I doubt anyone here is anti-science, you can't just che

by petodo 4y ago

> I’m constantly surprised at how much of an anti-science, anti-technology undercurrent there is on HN. I doubt anyone here is anti-science, you can't just cherrypick science results which suit your agenda and call other side anti-science because they see also different results. As for anti-technology, it's perfectle understandable people who are more familiar with technology than majority of the society are also more aware of potential risks, so they have problems with some new technology which brings new problems.

mrguyorama 4y ago
There are people on this forum that refuse to accept climate change is a real thing that really happens that we really cause. That's anti-science
- petodo 4y ago
  Again, I really doubt there is anyone denying there is climate change, which is natural phenomenon going continously for millions of years. The difference between people is some claim it's caused by us, while others claim it's natural and we are actually in cooler period now, so it's no big deal if planet will get warmer to levels seen before which are beneficial for development of life. I would be somewhere in between, of course going by butterfly effect we are contributing to it and maybe accelerating it, but I don't really see it as a bad thing.
mistermann 4y ago
I'm anti-science in that I strongly believe that focusing most of our attention and funding on hard science (to the detriment of things like psychology, philosophy, metaphysics, etc) has contributed to the production of the substantial percentage of comments in threads like this that are excessively reductive and heuristic in origin, but not realized as such. If we had invested more of our resources into understanding people, perhaps we wouldn't be having so many problems (many of which are substantially imaginary) with people. On the brighter side, there's a popular proverb that says: “The best time to plant a tree was 20 years ago. The second best time is now.”

by petodo 4y ago

mrguyorama 4y ago

There are people on this forum that refuse to accept climate change is a real thing that really happens that we really cause. That's anti-science

petodo 4y ago
Again, I really doubt there is anyone denying there is climate change, which is natural phenomenon going continously for millions of years. The difference between people is some claim it's caused by us, while others claim it's natural and we are actually in cooler period now, so it's no big deal if planet will get warmer to levels seen before which are beneficial for development of life. I would be somewhere in between, of course going by butterfly effect we are contributing to it and maybe accelerating it, but I don't really see it as a bad thing.

mistermann 4y ago

I'm anti-science in that I strongly believe that focusing most of our attention and funding on hard science (to the detriment of things like psychology, philosophy, metaphysics, etc) has contributed to the production of the substantial percentage of comments in threads like this that are excessively reductive and heuristic in origin, but not realized as such. If we had invested more of our resources into understanding people, perhaps we wouldn't be having so many problems (many of which are substantially imaginary) with people. On the brighter side, there's a popular proverb that says: “The best time to plant a tree was 20 years ago. The second best time is now.”