Science: No Place for Consensus

"Scientific" consensus sucks. It is science-defeating. It is anti-science.

Isaac Newton's "laws" of physics were unbreakable until that ding-dong Al Einstein guessed that Mercury should do a galactic jitterbug in the sky due to gravity's impact on light wave-particles.* Heck, we still cling to those laws, because, for everyday living, they do the job pretty well.

The problem is that scientific consensus usually does the job of keeping things running smoothly, until it doesn't. People forget that Galileo's problem wasn't that he was a man of science taking on the Catholic Church: he was a man of science taking on scientific consensus. The Catholics just happened to be in bed with the reigning consensus of the day.

So here's my word of advice: when they say "consensus," you say "Galileo."

*Kids: please don't use me for homework. Suck it up and borrow the Cliff's Notes guide to Quantum Physics from the deadbeat in the back of class. Oh wait. That's me. Proceed.

Penrose-Carter Diagram of the Finite Observer Looks A Lot Like Einstein

Einstein didn't know the guy, but he loved his work.

Great little sidebar: A mother brought her son to the rabbi, and the rabbi said to the boy; “I will give you a guilder if you can tell me where God lives.” The boy thought for only a moment and then said, “And I will give you two guilders if you can tell me where he doesn’t live.”