Scientists: Earth Endangered by New Strain of Fact-Resistant Humans

originally posted by: chiefsmom
"immune", "resistant" "strain"

hmmmm,
I wonder what "facts" they are resistant to?

Seems more like a dig at a certain group to me.

Nice they want to kill them off though. (sarcasm icon here)

It is a dig at groups that ignore facts. Facts would be testable verifiable truths.

Where did you come with them trying to kill someone?

Here is the article please find the part where they advocate death in any way.

MINNEAPOLIS (The Borowitz Report) – Scientists have discovered a powerful new strain of fact-resistant humans who are threatening the ability of Earth to sustain life, a sobering new study reports.

The research, conducted by the University of Minnesota, identifies a virulent strain of humans who are virtually immune to any form of verifiable knowledge, leaving scientists at a loss as to how to combat them.


“These humans appear to have all the faculties necessary to receive and process information,” Davis Logsdon, one of the scientists who contributed to the study, said. “And yet, somehow, they have developed defenses that, for all intents and purposes, have rendered those faculties totally inactive.”

More worryingly, Logsdon said, “As facts have multiplied, their defenses against those facts have only grown more powerful.”

While scientists have no clear understanding of the mechanisms that prevent the fact-resistant humans from absorbing data, they theorize that the strain may have developed the ability to intercept and discard information en route from the auditory nerve to the brain. “The normal functions of human consciousness have been completely nullified,” Logsdon said.

While reaffirming the gloomy assessments of the study, Logsdon held out hope that the threat of fact-resistant humans could be mitigated in the future. “Our research is very preliminary, but it’s possible that they will become more receptive to facts once they are in an environment without food, water, or oxygen,” he said.

Maybe it's more like a "New Strain of BS-Resistant Humans".

People have been lied-to and BS'ed for centuries by the very people that cause the problems to begin with.

a reply to: swanne

Funny how the article made no mention of any scientific theories that "fact resistant" people ignore facts on, yet you jump into the thread to immediately start spouting off the standard science denialism for your favorite science to deny. Sounds like the article hit a little too close to home for you.

originally posted by: xuenchen
Maybe it's more like a "New Strain of BS-Resistant Humans".

People have been lied-to and BS'ed for centuries by the very people that cause the problems to begin with.

Denying science isn't anti-BS. Sorry to tell you.

originally posted by: tanka418

MINNEAPOLIS (The Borowitz Report) – Scientists have discovered a powerful new strain of fact-resistant humans who are threatening the ability of Earth to sustain life, a sobering new study reports.

The research, conducted by the University of Minnesota, identifies a virulent strain of humans who are virtually immune to any form of verifiable knowledge, leaving scientists at a loss as to how to combat them.

-- www.newyorker.com...

It seem that increasingly people simply refuse to actually "look" at the reality, the facts, the real world data, and come up with some barely related "notion" of their own...

The reality is that humans, and by default, the data, are/is often easily corrupted/compromised. I guess you dont have any trust issues?
Do you rely on science for your common sense?

Why the absolute blind trust?

a reply to: AthlonSavage

Relativity hasn't been proven wrong.

originally posted by: Tucket

originally posted by: tanka418

MINNEAPOLIS (The Borowitz Report) – Scientists have discovered a powerful new strain of fact-resistant humans who are threatening the ability of Earth to sustain life, a sobering new study reports.

The research, conducted by the University of Minnesota, identifies a virulent strain of humans who are virtually immune to any form of verifiable knowledge, leaving scientists at a loss as to how to combat them.

-- www.newyorker.com...

It seem that increasingly people simply refuse to actually "look" at the reality, the facts, the real world data, and come up with some barely related "notion" of their own...

The reality is that humans, and by default, the data, are/is often easily corrupted/compromised. I guess you dont have any trust issues?
Do you rely on science for your common sense?

Why the absolute blind trust?

As a Data scientist, I would argue that the is NOT corrupt, or compromised by default. As a Data engineer/software architect, I would agree that our machines allow that corruption to occur all to easily. But, we kind of DO require the ability to correct data once it is in the "machine".

Trust issues...taken care of by what can be called; "confidence level"...you know; how confidant One is in the data they are using...it is actually a part of the overall equation.

And, no; there is absolutely NO "blind trust"...perhaps a wee bit of "Blind Faith" from time to time, but then again, Clapton is a good guitarist, and blues man.

"Common sense"; is neither common nor is it sense.

The source is The Newyorker by the way. They are as legit as can ever be. I read one of the best articles I have ever read 2 days ago, on that site. New Yorker is top quality!

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: MarioOnTheFly
a reply to: tanka418

I rely on science, and data for everything.

sadly...Science doesn't always rely on data like yourself.

Models are a new craze that's sweeping the world.

Science has always relied on models. It isn't a new craze. Models are what science uses to predict future events, and they are built by analyzing prior events.

Unfortunately "Past Performance is Not Necessarily Indicative of Future Results"

Second line.

a reply to: gspat

Yeah, what has science done for us, eh?

Some people.

a reply to: gspat

That's why science admits that its models are flawed. Science doesn't predict things with 100% accuracy and never claims to do so. Though, if you cannot show a reason why if all prior predictions show result X, all future predictions will show result Y then there is no reason to assume that X will become Y in the future. And you should therefore just continue to think that X will continue to occur.

By the way, are you aware that computers run based on the scientific model of electricity? Do you doubt that tomorrow electricity will continue to behave as it has always done? No, of course not. Tomorrow, you expect to sit down at your computer, turn the monitor on (or however you repower your pc) and continue using it as before, because electricity doesn't just randomly change its properties as time goes forward.

a reply to: tanka418

No bloody idea what exactly this refers to. "climate change deniers" possibly? Reads like sour grapes that people are resisting the faked "scientific" data that tells us all to pay carbon taxes to some global entity.

originally posted by: Quetzalcoatl14

originally posted by: tanka418

MINNEAPOLIS (The Borowitz Report) – Scientists have discovered a powerful new strain of fact-resistant humans who are threatening the ability of Earth to sustain life, a sobering new study reports.

The research, conducted by the University of Minnesota, identifies a virulent strain of humans who are virtually immune to any form of verifiable knowledge, leaving scientists at a loss as to how to combat them.

-- www.newyorker.com...

If this is supposed to be satire; why does it "feel" so right-on?

It seem that increasingly people simply refuse to actually "look" at the reality, the facts, the real world data, and come up with some barely related "notion" of their own...

I guess I'm just some relic of the ancient past; I rely on science, and data for everything.

Most people are in fact "faith-based," not evidence-based thinkers.

Scientific thinking means one purposefully gathers as much data, information, opinions, and facts as they can on any topic, and THEN choose the belief/hypothesis that accounts for all of the verifiable information found so far. If new information is found that violates it, you revisit the hypothesis, change it, or even swap it for a more comprehensive one.

Most people, on the other hand, do the opposite. They just take whatever cultural, religious, familial, or personal beliefs they have been taught or developed and then seek to always find new information to confirm those ideas and often will ignore or fight against any new information.

A scientist practices his craft religiously,and has faith in his intellect. Sounds religious to me. The Religon of Science is real but they will argue its not even though they do some of the same things. The peers are comparable to the PAPAL system an dall scientist down after are comparable to cardinals,and priest. They also collect donations to their Churchs as well. The scientific holy land is Greece where al modern science came from.

Super funny who feels insulted and who thinks it is a nice piece of writing. If we would have made a bet, i'd have won with 7/10.

a reply to: yuppa

Those are some TERRIBLE analogies to try to paint science as a faith... When was the last time you heard of a scientist going on a pilgrimage to Greece?

a reply to: Grimpachi

Once they are in an environment without food, water, or oxygen.

I'm sorry, was there some new development I don't know about? Can humans live without all 3 of those?

I apologize if there was.

originally posted by: GetHyped
a reply to: AthlonSavage

Relativity hasn't been proven wrong.

Ahh , but the speed of light may not be a constant.There have been several experiments of late to where light was measured from a known source at a known distance striking a special photo-electric plate. Per the experiments not only did the photons strike the plate at different times but apparently some reached the plate in advance of what they had expected. Research continues.
As Quantum Physics progresses , watch out for what we have been told isnt actually the way the universe works

a reply to: Gothmog

The speed of light is only constant in a vacuum.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Gothmog

The speed of light is only constant in a vacuum.

As a wave , perhaps not the actual photons. And the great one's Theory of Relativity may not be correct , anyway . I may start a thread on this later when I have time.(hahaha)

a reply to: Gothmog

Are you talking about this?
The Speed Of Light Can Vary In A Vacuum