Contrabang! #22 Lysenko Lies

New NASA Mission To Investigate Europa For Signs Of Life (link)

A couple issues ago, we stated that we believe mainstream scientists are greatly misdirected in their understanding of moons that emit water-vapor jets, such as Saturn's Enceladus. While that misdirection might compel them to send probes to those moons in the search of life, those missions will not be total wastes, as the bulk of the evidence collected should contradict some false assumptions they are making. That isn't the same as saying the results of a single mission will overturn the academic consensus; several missions to comets and asteroids have returned "surprising" results, which have resulted in no major changes to the theories of comet and asteroid formation. Still, the evidence must still count for something. The more it accumulates, the more likely the old belief systems will start to crumble.

Thus, it is fine to hear Ethan announce that NASA is sending a life-seeking mission to Europa, which is something like Jupiter's equivalent of Enceladus, with a (theoretical) subterranean ocean of liquid water heated by tidal forces with hydrothermal vents.

Scanning electron microscope image at the sub-cellular level. While DNA is an incredibly complex, long molecule, it is made of the same building blocks (atoms) as everything else. To the best of our knowledge, the DNA structure that life is based on predates the fossil record. The longer and more complex a DNA molecule is, the more potential structures, functions, and proteins it can encode.

There isn't really a need for this paragraph in this "Mostly Mute Monday" article, except that Ethan will support any theory that the mainstream consensus tells him is true and will go out of his way to do so. (He is a cheerleader, not a rational agent.) While DNA does encode protein, there is no evidence to support the theory that it encodes structures or functions, as is assumed by the biological materialists that dominate the academic world.

Deep under the sea, around hydrothermal vents, where no sunlight reaches, life still thrives on Earth. How to create life from non-life is one of the great open questions in science today, but if life can exist down here, perhaps undersea on Europa or Enceladus, there’s life, too. It will be more and better data, most likely collected and analyzed by experts, that will eventually determine the scientific answer to this mystery.

How to create life from non-life is not just one of the great open questions in science today, but is likely the great blunder in science of all time, as there is no supporting evidence for the theory at all. The most likely outcome of missions to Europa and Enceladus will be numerous surprising observations and declarations by experimenters of the need to questions basic assumptions. The theorists will at best sprinkle in some additional complexity if needed, but generally continue on as if the new evidence did not exist.

Is LIGO About To Destroy The Theory Of A ‘Mass Gap’ Between Neutron Stars And Black Holes? (link)

Well there is a paradox. Will the bunk experiment disprove the non-existent mass gap? The problem with LIGO that it's not truly a science experiment. They massage a noisy signal until they get something that looks one of their 20,000 hypothetical event signatures. The mass gap is a fiction resulting from their theory of neutron stars - the most ridiculous construct in all of astrophysics. They've had to limit the theoretical size so the stars won't be destroyed by their own high rotation speeds. Thus, the gap.

The way you form stars is via the collapse of a molecular cloud of gas.

It's always worth pointing out that not only is Ethan incapable of thinking for himself, he is also a terrible writer. I, the reader, do not form stars. Only God could be doing that, but I'm sure Ethan wouldn't agree with that one case where his writing might be correct.

Quantum Physics Is Fine, Human Bias About Reality Is The Real Problem (link)

Here Ethan explores some of the consequences of quantum mechanics and comes to an unexpected conclusion.

Understanding the Universe isn’t about revealing a true reality, divorced from observers, measurements, and interactions. The Universe could exist in such a fashion where that’s a valid approach, but it could equally be the case that reality is inextricably interwoven with the act of measurement, observation, and interaction at a fundamental level.

Entertaining the notion that the universe might not be a sterile, soulless expanse ruled by randomness plus arbitrary laws of physics is not the expected answer from the foremost cheerleader of scientific materialism. Is Ethan actually developing independent, rational thought? Another paragraph gives a clue.

While Sean Carroll just argued in Sunday’s New York Times that physicists should care more about (and spend more time and energy studying) these quantum foundations, most physicists — myself included — don’t agree.

It's certainly not unexpected that Ethan would follow the herd, but that only pushes the question up one level. Why is the mainstream of scientists, who routinely ignore evidence that goes against the materialistic conclusion, opting for the less materialistic option in regards to quantum mechanics? I would expect them to choose the observer-independent model of the universe and rationalize all objections away. But that is not the case here. Truly a mystery of modern physics.

Government-Censored Science Doomed The USSR, And The USA May Be Next (link) 

In this one he tells the tale of Lysenkoism - when the Soviet government endorsed the opinions of one biologist (who wrapped it all in the guise of collectivist values) while discouraging dissent. Lysenko's promises of great agricultural breakthroughs never materialized. Thus, Ethan warns of the same possible trend in the US, where the government endorses certain scientific results over others.

It's certainly a concern here, particularly in the realm of climate change. Two years ago a scandal came out of NOAA, where scientists said they were receiving political pressure to have certain pro-warming results ready ahead of the upcoming Paris Climate Accords. A year before that, the state of Oregon banned any educational materials that included skepticism of global warming. In addition to that, the federal government controls the bulk of scientific funding. So there is room for concern.

Ironically, Ethan himself points to climate change science as his evidence of government interference, but alleges that it is Trump directing scientific outcomes! (This is the third time in Contrabang!'s 22 editions that Ethan has revealed his personal presidential preferences while supposedly writing on science. They just can't help themselves.) The reasoning was a supposed scandal in which Trump included Alabama in his public announcement regarding Hurricane Dorian. This led to criticism that Alabama was not likely to see significant effects and thus the warning would cause needless concern.

I reckon that Trump was acting out of an excess of caution because, in the off chance Alabama was hit, the media would call him careless for not alerting Alabama and responsible for any casualties. The storm tracks did show Dorian brushing by Alabama, so it was included. I did not follow this story closely, but I did see that, at one point, every single model showed Dorian making landfall in Florida. Thus, it was nearly certain that Dorian would make landfall in Florida, in the same way it was nearly certain that Dorian would not hit Alabama. But Dorian did not make landfall in Florida after all. It's not inconceivable that Dorian could have juked the other way.

The point is, Trump going above the official forecasts to give warning to Alabama is not at all a political or scientific scandal. It is not evidence of creeping Lysenkoism. Legislation to outlaw a particular scientific viewpoint, such as what was passed by the state of Oregon, is effectively Lysenkoism. Perhaps Ethan, who lives in Portland, should use his reach to rectify that particular government abuse of science.