banuk_sickness_eater

banuk_sickness_eater t1_jbe8glq wrote

Reply to Humans Started Riding Horses 5,000 Years Ago, New Evidence Suggests by Magister_Xehanort

Damn, a thousand years after the advent of civilization, and 250,000 years after the emergence of behaviorally modern man.

Imagine just having to walk everywhere with all your shit all the time having no way to convienly carry any thing you manage to accumulate except for the muscles on your back.

The extreme poverty of life of pre-horse steppe wanderers must've been immemse.

I wonder what it must've been like for somewhere like China to see the vast ocean of haggardly feckless wretches always ambling around at your peripheries go from absolutely pitiable non-factors too suddenly start showing up to battles with the ancient version of nukes that completely fuck you up and topple your civilization every couple generations.

−1

banuk_sickness_eater t1_j9q03dz wrote

Reply to comment by ironborn123 in Bernie Sanders proposes taxes on robots that take jobs by Scarlet_pot2

I really hope Truman isn't your choice of example for the efficacy of the businessman-President. Truman was a blithering dolt entirely unprepared and unfit for the presidency. He was failed local business owner turned pawn unwittingly wedged into his role as vice president (a role originally fitted to Henry Wallace) by the crony political muscling of Louisiana Party Boss Thomas Pendergast who wanted to reassert his Grenzsteifen by sticking his dick in FDR's birthday cake.

Truman numerous foibles and flaccid leadership directly lead to the runaway big stick foreign policy spearheaded by Secretary of State James Byrnes directly following WW-2 that so deepened the chill of Russian mistrust of American military intentions, that peripidiously billowed into the half-century long existential nightmare known as the Cold War- which humanity only recently barely survived the thawing of by the freezer burned skin of our collective balls.

2

banuk_sickness_eater t1_j5ht9e8 wrote

Reply to comment by watevauwant in What do you think an ordinary, non-billionaire non-PhD person should be doing, preparing, or looking out for? by Six-headed_dogma_man

Malthusian doom and gloom is so intellectually lazy. It astounds me how enraptured people still are by apocalyptic narratives even though every generation since Christ has spent the last 2 thousand years screaming their heads off about how the end is nigh as life literally only got better and better.

Let slip the surely bonds of your limbic system and chill out.

0

banuk_sickness_eater t1_j4cijan wrote

Reply to comment by Azecap in Breakthrough milestone in understanding the reversal of aging by duffmanhb

Sure there are a lot of adjuncts at colleges but there aren't many co-chairs of their department at Harvard.

I'm not trying to simply appeal to authority here, but that is a very lofty title at very respected institution. One article from Charles Brenner, a highly respected researcher in his own regard at an equally well regarded research institute- while highly troubling- doesn't totally convince me that Sinclair has lost the faith of a majority, or even a large portion, of his colleagues.

I guess my question is if he was such a quack, how does he keep his job and how does he keep getting published in highly prestigious journals such as Cell?

My guess would be there are opaque internal politics involved that those not behind the scenes aren't privy. Which would make this seem more like a collegial spat or personal vendetta settling than wholly honest critical peer review. But I'm very open to being wrong.

I'm sorry to pester, but I'm largely unfamiliar with the intricacies of this field. May you, or anyone who works in the field, please provide some more sources of legitimate criticism for Sinclair from his peers?

2