Last Friday, the twenty sixth 12 months of the Stray Boulders award of the Czech Sisyphos Club of Skeptics befell. Antichena is awarded for pseudo-scientific work. At that point Denník N spoke to him Lenka Prilatová from the Sisyphus Committee.
In the interview, we requested concerning the arguments of Lukáš Machala from the Ministry of Culture of Slovakia a couple of flat Earth, whether or not there are extraterrestrials, whether or not religion and science are suitable, what are the main issues of contemporary science or science is turning into so. an knowledgeable who places folks at a loss.
“Science isn’t remaining statements. It’s not that the earth is spherical, now we have gravity, or that evolution works. Science is primarily how we uncover, check, or disprove these findings. Science is the artwork of discarding prior data once we discover that issues are completely different. Science is a means of interacting with the world to make it helpful for us. It is a instrument of curiosity,” says Lenka Příplatová.
In the interview, we additionally requested about:
- how the holders of the Wandering Stone are chosen and the way folks react to the discharge of the anti-prize;
- what readers and viewers ought to pay attention to in order to not consider in deception and learn how to inform if a psychic is spreading nonsense;
- whether or not we should always depend on scientific consensus and why;
- even when science excludes the paranormal or now we have not discovered sufficient proof of their existence;
- how does a scientist see if a part of the general public thinks that scientists have unhealthy intentions, wish to hurt folks or deceive them.
Should the general public media focus on that the earth is flat?
There are two factors of view. It is true that once we first focus on this matter, we’re promoting to conspirators – and this additionally applies to Stray Boulder carriers. The concept that 10 folks had was heard everywhere in the nation directly. This is considerably problematic.
But if these matters should not mentioned, it creates the impression that “one thing is hidden” or “they don’t have any option to reply”. Many instances I discover that when scientists and specialists refuse to touch upon some nonsense, for instance creation (the concept the world was created by supernatural human intervention, notice in crimson.), somebody you want writes a assessment a couple of ebook. For many individuals, matters such because the flat Earth or creationism appear to resonate when scientists ignore them.
Doesn’t the talk between the physicist and the layman current an issue within the sense that we’re placing the knowledgeable’s opinion and the layman’s on the identical degree?
I’m not a fan of the “5 minutes Hitler and 5 minutes Judaism” false intention. I do not assume {that a} flat clay scientist, naturalist or supporter of different non-scientific views needs to be invited on Czech and Slovak tv or anyplace else. This places their views on the identical degree. In addition, for those who spew a variety of nonsense, it takes you a lot instances extra time to place every of them within the right order. The author of nonsense has a bonus.
My opinion is that in these circumstances the report needs to be made on the proof in favor of the idea of evolution or that the earth is spherical. Provide the viewers with proof of how the findings had been made, clarify how they will confirm them, and the place they will discover extra info.
Lukáš Machala from the Ministry of Culture defended the potential flatness of the Earth with these phrases: “Have you ever been in house? I do not know.” Is such an argument honest? If not, why?
I usually encounter this argument in litigation