Curate, connect, and discover
so a while back the U.S. Supreme Court demand quantitative rationales for regulatory decisions; hence, the scientific study on climate change goes beyond the facts and maintains fidelity by using economics ideas. Since the climate change study uses probability and uncertainty for risk predictions, they raise questions about the epistemology on how scientists know what they know, and what evidences are used to validate the study... basically what i’m saying is that looking at these presidential debates, it almost (well, certainly) feels like they are a mere chicanery onto discussing dogma and not the future of our humankind — say virtual reality or sending bots to alpha centauri. Its just kinda sad to see how gullible our society is. This just reminds me of the philosophical psychology of Sherlock Holmes. Essentially we, as evolving species, should be more mindful as in to be more aware — we must observe, not merely to see, that is with our eyes, but the rest of our senses (im just saying not to be ignorant and think critically [though this is such a generic term])