September 5, 2023

Technology is deteriorating into nonfunctionality. The judging and predicting problem is allowing it, though not always causing it.

Part of the problem can't be avoided. Lawyers and politicians cannot evaluate the complexities of science and must find some method of determining who is telling the truth on science related subjects. They always fail.

That's because getting complexities right requires completeness. Half way there will always be misleading. For that reason, few persons are even in a position which allows them to be complete on complex subjects. Certainly, university scientists are no longer in such a position. They have too many demands placed upon them, while the complexities keep increasing. They can get some things right but not everything right, which destroys their judgement and ability to predict in science.

An example is engineers building magnetic lifts for elevators in aircraft carriers, when there is no such thing as magnetic lifts. Maybe journalists stated it wrong; but even if it was electric motors, there is no way to coordinate electric motors when in motion.

Only persons who do a lot of hands-on work with complex technology understand the problems that need to be considered. Most engineers now days do little or no hands-on work. Bureaucrats do none, while they impose such Earth destroying absurdities onto society as claiming electric motors get 96% efficiency. They got aligned upon the resistive load of motors, which is negligible, and didn't know there was an inductive load that creates the kinetic energy.

Any idiot should know that one molecule in 2,500 is not going to have the slightest influence on the atmosphere no matter what its temperature is or what it does. But nonscientists don't usually know what 400 parts per million is or why it would matter.

Science has almost totally been reduced to absurdities due to the problem. Scientists study by looking through a straw, in part due to the distractions and demands placed upon them, besides the technical complexities. Molecular biology creates that problem. Whatever molecules do, a very wide range of related science needs to be studied to evaluate what those molecules are doing in nature.

An example is morel mushroom scientists claiming the morel is 129 million years old in evolutionary age based on phylogenetics and their accumulated information, which is next to none. The morel evolved from a single-celled yeast a few months ago. It is a dramatic example of extreme evolution. The university scientists try to fit it into previous assumptions and get everything about the organism wrong that can be gotten wrong. They didn't know that no mushrooms evolved between 300 million years ago and 55 million years ago.

Where it matter most is in electric and transportation systems being destroyed to save mankind from carbon dioxide, which is in short supply and destroying all biology due to its shortage. All biology will die out in 2 to 10 million years due to over differentiation, which means too many interdepend complexities; but the shortage of carbon dioxide will probably destroy biology sooner, because the unlimited calcium in oceans draws CO2 from the air and ties it up as calcium carbonate and limestone.

People want to believe they can solve the carbon problem and any related problem required for the purpose. Trying to wish solutions into existence in the face of obvious failures and limitations is a real problem in judgement and prediction. Persons who know nothing about such major subjects should not be influencing the results. But know-nothings took over the subject and allowed no criticism of it.

The carbon fraud was only possible because physicists long ago reduced physics to fraud and used it to monger power at everyone else's expense. Then the rest of the power mongers found the fraud to be exploitable, which generated a "consensus" as a substitute for truth. Promoting the frauds is now called "fact checking," where is should be called fraud checking.

The drive for electric vehicles ran aground years ago, while everyone involved assumed the problems were solvable. Industrialists are fighting with each other over scarce materials, while the general public cannot justify the vehicles and nothing can improve the result. Not knowing that those problems are not solvable is awful poor judgment. When the metals aren't there, they aren't there. Geologists didn't miss very many somewhere.

Assuming every problem is solvable is beyond stupidity. Metals are not replaceable. Recycling pollutes environments and uses more of one thing to salvage something else. It's like producing protein in vats. A billion years of evolution solved those problems with efficiency. Pouring slop around maximizes the inefficiency in wasting resources and polluting environments. Why wouldn't anyone with half a brain know that?

Technicians and engineers like to do that sort of thing whether it works or not. But why does someone want to lose money paying them to do it? Because power mongers need fraud to take over the social structures; and they ripped off enough resources to go from one fraud to another losing money at all of them. They redistribute their wealth through financialization schemes including a stock market that is no longer a stock market, with irrational exuberance, and buying and selling companies. One group rips off the money and a different group spends it.