This is a topic I have found relevant throughout my career as a geologist. I can give you many more examples, and what I often find most frustrating is that other scientists fail to have a sense of scientific doubt. I worked with a scientist who was near retirement, but who had found the things he could see in a scanning electron microscope to be fascinating. He began looking at samples of concretions from humans, along with sedimentary rocks, and meteors under the SEM and began to see what he believed were fossilized nanometer-size-bacteria. Of course biologists thought this was impossible as no living cell could be that small, but he persisted, and at one point suspected he had found nano-bacteria in Martian rock samples. Then it was discovered that there were relics of the gold coating process that might account for this. I don't know if it was ever resolved, the possibility remains, but the doubters who simply refuse to accept the possibility are abundant. He was probably only allowed to do this research because he had a body of past work that was so well respected.
Another example from geology is continental drift. Some geologists and many "science reporters" still use this term even though it was proven wrong 60 years ago when plate tectonics began to be confirmed.
But one of the most impactful examples is that of the shale revolution in oil and gas. It was as recently as the 1990's considered by most geoscientists that source rock intervals, like shale, had expelled their oil and gas if they had reached that stage and were impossible to get any more oil or gas out of. This was supported by well logging methods, but mostly by ignoring these intervals and not trying to produce oil from them. Then when Mitchell Energy decided to try hydraulic fracturing of the Barnett Shale, they proved the old paradigm wrong. So wrong, that a year 2000 estimate of world-wide resource of oil and gas was 3 trillion barrels (Chevron), and today that estimate stands closer to 12 trillion barrels, showing we have far more oil and gas than ever believed possible. During the same period we underwent this revolutionary rethinking, many prominent geologists were campaigning for "Peak Oil" which simply did not happen. Another example along these lines is that of Dr. Leigh Price who spent most of his career studying the Bakken Shale. He estimated the total resource to be between 270 and 530 billion barrels with recoveries as high as 50%. He died before he could get his work published, so while his draft is passed around quietly, it has never reached the public or had final peer review. Many estimates since have tried to cut this resource to as little as 4 or 5 billion barrels recoverable, but it seems these are the people who refuse to understand the new paradigm (and who refused to publish Price). Price's work has not been disproven but remains largely hidden.
It was Dr. Folk, of the Folk carbonate classification system. He passed away in 2018.I think the idea of nanobacteria was reasonably invalidated, but it also led to new discoveries of nano-size particles in living organisms by biologists who were brought into the debate by a geologist. As a student I was inspired by Dr. Folk's willingness to test new and radical ideas and risk being wrong. Interesting article: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-rise-and-fall-of-nanobacteria/
The harm done by the pseudo-scientific idea that saturated fat in the diet caused heart disease is immense. It was really started by a single scientist, Ancil Keyes at the University of Minnesota. As you point out, there is accumulating evidence that it is excessive carbohydrate consumption that is behind the epidemic of obesity and diabetes.
Thanks. Needed that. I was bullied online for changing my mind on anthropogenic climate change, reminding eveyone of the Precautionary Principle, advocating the rollout of HBOT as a safe and effective therapy for "the virus", warning of environmental sustainability impacts to what's happening in western China and their coal based development to what's happening to the water supply in the western USA. I like good scientific inquiry as it challenges as you noted, preconceived politically based notions.
----------
NF-κB is a family of ubiquitous transcription factors first described by Sen and Baltimore in 1986 as the regulator of kappa light chain gene in murine B lymphocytes.[3] The family members are NF-κB1 (p50), NF-κB2 (p52), RelA (p65), RelB, and cRel.[4] Any homo or heterodimer combination of these members is considered as NF-κB, but the classic form of NF-κB is the combination of p50 and p65.[4] Inside the cytoplasm, NF-κB exists as a complex with a protein known as inhibitor κB (IκB) and different types of IκB are IκBa, IκBβ, IκBέ, IκB-r, p100, p102, and BCL3.[4] When cells are stimulated with various activators such as tumor necrosis factor α (TNF-α), interleukin-1 (IL-1), lipopolysaccharide (LPS), oxidants and viruses phosphorylation, ubiquitination, and subsequent degradation of IκB occurs. Thus, NF-κB is made free and is transported to the nucleus where it activates target genes
----------------
Or this.
Geophys Res Lett. 2022 Jul 16; 49(13): e2022GL099381.
Published online 2022 Jul 1. doi: 10.1029/2022GL099381
PMCID: PMC9285945
PMID: 35865735
The Hunga Tonga‐Hunga Ha'apai Hydration of the Stratosphere
L. Millán, 1 M. L. Santee, 1 A. Lambert, 1 N. J. Livesey, 1 F. Werner, 1 M. J. Schwartz, 1 H. C. Pumphrey, 2 G. L. Manney, 3 , 4 Y. Wang, 1 , 5 H. Su, 1 L. Wu, 1 W. G. Read, 1 and L. Froidevaux 1
Abstract
Following the 15 January 2022 Hunga Tonga‐Hunga Ha'apai eruption, several trace gases measured by the Aura Microwave Limb Sounder (MLS) displayed anomalous stratospheric values. Trajectories and radiance simulations confirm that the H2O, SO2, and HCl enhancements were injected by the eruption. In comparison with those from previous eruptions, the SO2 and HCl mass injections were unexceptional, although they reached higher altitudes. In contrast, the H2O injection was unprecedented in both magnitude (far exceeding any previous values in the 17‐year MLS record) and altitude (penetrating into the mesosphere). We estimate the mass of H2O injected into the stratosphere to be 146 ± 5 Tg, or ∼10% of the stratospheric burden. It may take several years for the H2O plume to dissipate. This eruption could impact climate not through surface cooling due to sulfate aerosols, but rather through surface warming due to the radiative forcing from the excess stratospheric H2O.
----------
It's all about being told what not to know and hiding it in plain sight.
I remember in the mid 80s as a dr having pts worried their cholesterol was .1 above recommended level and telling them to ignore all this and carry on calmly.
When cholesterol was the rage our upper level of Normal was 6. As drugs were released the normal dropped to now 5 so more and more became fodder for the pharmaceutical industry.
Now with PSA once high and surgeons get involved instead of a wait and see policy provided no symptoms etc. surgeons love surgery and to quote the founder of Berkshire Hathaway;
“Never ask a barber if you need a haircut.”
People never discuss the side effects of surgery and its many failures, they get brushed aside.
Thanks for the thoughtful article. Science is rarely *settled*. And, when meteorologists can accurately predict the weather (based on their many models) I might begin to believe they might be able to accurately predict climate!
And, just as Copernicus was placed on house arrest for the blasphemy of agreeing with Galileo, you have experienced the "settled science syndrome" via the University of Alabama Geology Department cool aid hoax followers.
Pity. We must strive to spread the importance of Scientific Method over blind faith.
Off topic, but if you are interested in my field, computational fluid dynamics, I have a long blog post at Climate Etc. on the challenges and how people are way overconfident in their results.
This is a topic I have found relevant throughout my career as a geologist. I can give you many more examples, and what I often find most frustrating is that other scientists fail to have a sense of scientific doubt. I worked with a scientist who was near retirement, but who had found the things he could see in a scanning electron microscope to be fascinating. He began looking at samples of concretions from humans, along with sedimentary rocks, and meteors under the SEM and began to see what he believed were fossilized nanometer-size-bacteria. Of course biologists thought this was impossible as no living cell could be that small, but he persisted, and at one point suspected he had found nano-bacteria in Martian rock samples. Then it was discovered that there were relics of the gold coating process that might account for this. I don't know if it was ever resolved, the possibility remains, but the doubters who simply refuse to accept the possibility are abundant. He was probably only allowed to do this research because he had a body of past work that was so well respected.
Another example from geology is continental drift. Some geologists and many "science reporters" still use this term even though it was proven wrong 60 years ago when plate tectonics began to be confirmed.
But one of the most impactful examples is that of the shale revolution in oil and gas. It was as recently as the 1990's considered by most geoscientists that source rock intervals, like shale, had expelled their oil and gas if they had reached that stage and were impossible to get any more oil or gas out of. This was supported by well logging methods, but mostly by ignoring these intervals and not trying to produce oil from them. Then when Mitchell Energy decided to try hydraulic fracturing of the Barnett Shale, they proved the old paradigm wrong. So wrong, that a year 2000 estimate of world-wide resource of oil and gas was 3 trillion barrels (Chevron), and today that estimate stands closer to 12 trillion barrels, showing we have far more oil and gas than ever believed possible. During the same period we underwent this revolutionary rethinking, many prominent geologists were campaigning for "Peak Oil" which simply did not happen. Another example along these lines is that of Dr. Leigh Price who spent most of his career studying the Bakken Shale. He estimated the total resource to be between 270 and 530 billion barrels with recoveries as high as 50%. He died before he could get his work published, so while his draft is passed around quietly, it has never reached the public or had final peer review. Many estimates since have tried to cut this resource to as little as 4 or 5 billion barrels recoverable, but it seems these are the people who refuse to understand the new paradigm (and who refused to publish Price). Price's work has not been disproven but remains largely hidden.
I believe I may have worked with him... Or at least was his TA. Dr Schopf?
It was Dr. Folk, of the Folk carbonate classification system. He passed away in 2018.I think the idea of nanobacteria was reasonably invalidated, but it also led to new discoveries of nano-size particles in living organisms by biologists who were brought into the debate by a geologist. As a student I was inspired by Dr. Folk's willingness to test new and radical ideas and risk being wrong. Interesting article: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-rise-and-fall-of-nanobacteria/
The harm done by the pseudo-scientific idea that saturated fat in the diet caused heart disease is immense. It was really started by a single scientist, Ancil Keyes at the University of Minnesota. As you point out, there is accumulating evidence that it is excessive carbohydrate consumption that is behind the epidemic of obesity and diabetes.
It's weird feeling that do much of what I thought was scientifically true may not be.
Thomas Kuhn smiles
Thanks. Needed that. I was bullied online for changing my mind on anthropogenic climate change, reminding eveyone of the Precautionary Principle, advocating the rollout of HBOT as a safe and effective therapy for "the virus", warning of environmental sustainability impacts to what's happening in western China and their coal based development to what's happening to the water supply in the western USA. I like good scientific inquiry as it challenges as you noted, preconceived politically based notions.
----------
NF-κB is a family of ubiquitous transcription factors first described by Sen and Baltimore in 1986 as the regulator of kappa light chain gene in murine B lymphocytes.[3] The family members are NF-κB1 (p50), NF-κB2 (p52), RelA (p65), RelB, and cRel.[4] Any homo or heterodimer combination of these members is considered as NF-κB, but the classic form of NF-κB is the combination of p50 and p65.[4] Inside the cytoplasm, NF-κB exists as a complex with a protein known as inhibitor κB (IκB) and different types of IκB are IκBa, IκBβ, IκBέ, IκB-r, p100, p102, and BCL3.[4] When cells are stimulated with various activators such as tumor necrosis factor α (TNF-α), interleukin-1 (IL-1), lipopolysaccharide (LPS), oxidants and viruses phosphorylation, ubiquitination, and subsequent degradation of IκB occurs. Thus, NF-κB is made free and is transported to the nucleus where it activates target genes
----------------
Or this.
Geophys Res Lett. 2022 Jul 16; 49(13): e2022GL099381.
Published online 2022 Jul 1. doi: 10.1029/2022GL099381
PMCID: PMC9285945
PMID: 35865735
The Hunga Tonga‐Hunga Ha'apai Hydration of the Stratosphere
L. Millán, 1 M. L. Santee, 1 A. Lambert, 1 N. J. Livesey, 1 F. Werner, 1 M. J. Schwartz, 1 H. C. Pumphrey, 2 G. L. Manney, 3 , 4 Y. Wang, 1 , 5 H. Su, 1 L. Wu, 1 W. G. Read, 1 and L. Froidevaux 1
Abstract
Following the 15 January 2022 Hunga Tonga‐Hunga Ha'apai eruption, several trace gases measured by the Aura Microwave Limb Sounder (MLS) displayed anomalous stratospheric values. Trajectories and radiance simulations confirm that the H2O, SO2, and HCl enhancements were injected by the eruption. In comparison with those from previous eruptions, the SO2 and HCl mass injections were unexceptional, although they reached higher altitudes. In contrast, the H2O injection was unprecedented in both magnitude (far exceeding any previous values in the 17‐year MLS record) and altitude (penetrating into the mesosphere). We estimate the mass of H2O injected into the stratosphere to be 146 ± 5 Tg, or ∼10% of the stratospheric burden. It may take several years for the H2O plume to dissipate. This eruption could impact climate not through surface cooling due to sulfate aerosols, but rather through surface warming due to the radiative forcing from the excess stratospheric H2O.
----------
It's all about being told what not to know and hiding it in plain sight.
I remember in the mid 80s as a dr having pts worried their cholesterol was .1 above recommended level and telling them to ignore all this and carry on calmly.
Amr
Retired Dr.
I think we may be doing the same with PSA counts. Would like your thoughts?
Sorry for delay, different time zones etc.
When cholesterol was the rage our upper level of Normal was 6. As drugs were released the normal dropped to now 5 so more and more became fodder for the pharmaceutical industry.
Now with PSA once high and surgeons get involved instead of a wait and see policy provided no symptoms etc. surgeons love surgery and to quote the founder of Berkshire Hathaway;
“Never ask a barber if you need a haircut.”
People never discuss the side effects of surgery and its many failures, they get brushed aside.
I am now 70 and only do PSA every 2-3 years.
Regards,
Amr Australia and keep up good work.
Thanks for the thoughtful article. Science is rarely *settled*. And, when meteorologists can accurately predict the weather (based on their many models) I might begin to believe they might be able to accurately predict climate!
And, just as Copernicus was placed on house arrest for the blasphemy of agreeing with Galileo, you have experienced the "settled science syndrome" via the University of Alabama Geology Department cool aid hoax followers.
Pity. We must strive to spread the importance of Scientific Method over blind faith.
Galileo was punished by the Roman Catholic inquisition, not Copernicus. My bad.
Off topic, but if you are interested in my field, computational fluid dynamics, I have a long blog post at Climate Etc. on the challenges and how people are way overconfident in their results.
https://judithcurry.com/2022/12/02/colorful-fluid-dynamics-and-overconfidence-in-global-climate-models/
And I have a followup on the pandemic's effect on science.
https://judithcurry.com/2023/04/23/how-the-disinformation-industrial-complex-is-destroying-trust-in-science/