It's naive to suggest that the public has accepted climate change and even more so that it's anthropogenic. Once they do accept that, then the debate can move on to the difficult question of solutions, as you rightly point out; but for now, it's the deniers who make all the noise and stifle that much-needed debate.
Consensus is an important part of science, but it is not the only part. The scientific method is strong enough that the truth eventually prevails even if the current consensus is wrong (such as for your Einstein example). People who spread ignorance use the fact that consensus is not always correct to disregard it whenever it disagrees with their point of view. Hence "teach the controversy".
What amazes me is the guy's restraint when talking to these morons. It's impressive how he keeps his cool and repeats such clear explanations of basic arithmetic in the face of immense stupidity. His frustration lets him down a little at the end when he falls into the same trap of quoting a hypothetical rate if 1 cent per KB and then multiplying 0.001 by his kilobyte usage--which is exactly what Verizon is doing; but we can forgive that--he was tired by then!
The sad thing is that even if those idiots read every posting on this thread, they still wouldn't get it.
You're absolutely right. If his justification for all this was simply to provide his students with a fun and accessible way to understand number sets and mathematical operations and properties, then he deserves our praise. I must admit that these concepts meant nothing to me when I was taught them at school (was I even taught them?); they only began to fall into place when I had to review them to help my own children with their schoolwork.
However, he takes himself way too seriously (and so does the BBC, unfortunately). It looks like he really believes he has come up with an profound new mathematical paradigm and that's bullshit. No praise from me.
But this is true of any invention; Bell Labs no more "invented" the transistor than Thomas Edison "invented" the light bulb or James Watt "invented" the steam engine. Sure, they made huge contributions--and deserve all credit for that--but they did so by standing on the shoulders of generations of other great scientists and engineers. It is a characteristic of human nature that we insist on simple answers to complicated questions, on convenient labels for complex entities.
That reminds me of the story about the American tourist visiting a stately home just outside London. She was so impressed she commented to the tour guide "Oh, it's beautiful... but why did they build it so close to the airport?"
Slashdot Mirror
It's naive to suggest that the public has accepted climate change and even more so that it's anthropogenic. Once they do accept that, then the debate can move on to the difficult question of solutions, as you rightly point out; but for now, it's the deniers who make all the noise and stifle that much-needed debate.
Consensus is an important part of science, but it is not the only part. The scientific method is strong enough that the truth eventually prevails even if the current consensus is wrong (such as for your Einstein example). People who spread ignorance use the fact that consensus is not always correct to disregard it whenever it disagrees with their point of view. Hence "teach the controversy".
What amazes me is the guy's restraint when talking to these morons. It's impressive how he keeps his cool and repeats such clear explanations of basic arithmetic in the face of immense stupidity. His frustration lets him down a little at the end when he falls into the same trap of quoting a hypothetical rate if 1 cent per KB and then multiplying 0.001 by his kilobyte usage--which is exactly what Verizon is doing; but we can forgive that--he was tired by then!
The sad thing is that even if those idiots read every posting on this thread, they still wouldn't get it.
You're absolutely right. If his justification for all this was simply to provide his students with a fun and accessible way to understand number sets and mathematical operations and properties, then he deserves our praise. I must admit that these concepts meant nothing to me when I was taught them at school (was I even taught them?); they only began to fall into place when I had to review them to help my own children with their schoolwork.
However, he takes himself way too seriously (and so does the BBC, unfortunately). It looks like he really believes he has come up with an profound new mathematical paradigm and that's bullshit. No praise from me.
...and just think of the money to be made in Florida with all hanging chads!
But this is true of any invention; Bell Labs no more "invented" the transistor than Thomas Edison "invented" the light bulb or James Watt "invented" the steam engine. Sure, they made huge contributions--and deserve all credit for that--but they did so by standing on the shoulders of generations of other great scientists and engineers.
It is a characteristic of human nature that we insist on simple answers to complicated questions, on convenient labels for complex entities.
For a fascinating read on the origins of Murphy's law, check out
9 /v 9i5/murphy/murphy0.html
http://www.improb.com/airchives/paperair/volume
Blessed are the cheesemakers...
That reminds me of the story about the American tourist visiting a stately home just outside London.
She was so impressed she commented to the tour guide "Oh, it's beautiful... but why did they build it so close to the airport?"