I am an autodidactic self teaching life long student.
“Self-education is the essence of genuine learning. Self-education provides the vitality that enables us to turn information into knowledge and to use it in such a way that it adds meaning to life. Indeed, without the dynamism of self-education, we fail to develop our own interests to the degree that they become driving forces in their own right. When our motivation arises from internal sources the value of lifelong learning becomes readily apparent to us.”
“Adult learning is more than alternative education, self-help, self-study, or training. Self-directed inquiry can free you from the cultural traps of today’s postmodern world. When you think for yourself, you take control of your life. Intellectual ability and critical thinking soon become substitutes for paper credentials. You’ll enjoy a higher quality of life, make smarter career choices, and begin to see ways to better our society.” – Autodidactic Press Books
I study Belief, Faith, Knowledge, Agreement Realities, Consensus and how they aid or cripple people. I study cults, and how beliefs impact interpersonal interactions and inter-group dynamics in the wider culture and within subcultures.
I am a skeptic. As a systems scientist I make my living being skeptical, it’s an essential skill for finding out how things actually work. Inherently a major portion of my learning skills are using questions to inquire into how things work and many of those questions are “show me the evidence” or “how can I verify your claims” or “how can that experiment be done at home” …. One of my aims is to find out what the actual alleged evidence for a claim is and then attempt to validate or refute that (however the case may turn out to be).
Regarding climate science, I am not a professional climate scientist however I’ve been studying it for a long while now. Climate science is a vast field which is precisely why I ask questions of experts and of those asserting any claims especially claims that it’s “established science” as that means that they must present hard evidence with verification tests that can be used to validate or refute their claims. Failure to present the evidence along with the means to verify their claims means that it’s not “settled science” and certainly not verifiable science (the current state of String Theory for example). Non-verifiable scientific claims are highly problematic indeed.
Anyone who claims they know everything about a field of science is, well to be polite, pulling the wool over your eyes.
While I’m not a professional climate scientist I have over the last ten years or so been learning a lot about climate science attempting to ascertain if the wild claims of those soothsaying doomsday scenarios with the Catastrophic AGW Hypothesis have any merit to their claims or not. It is a strange journey into the depths of many fields of science indeed. Strange because at times the “wild claims seem like they are so much soothsaying of doomsday”.
Even stranger still is the vehemence that people spew when you ask them basic questions to explain the science so that one might comprehend what they are asserting and the evidential basis for it so that one can verify or refute their claims.
Why is it that people are so angry when they are asked basic science questions? It’s like it’s an annoyance to them, an inconvenience to provide the evidence and how they arrived at their conclusions. That is against the Philosophy of Science and the Scientific Method which have as a key essential aspect skepticism and asking questions to find out what is valid science and what is not.
Sorting out the nonsense from the real stuff is much harder due to the volume of material. Fortunately there are some straight forward sanity checks that can be applied that bound the problems and put them into perspective.
Still much to learn and much to test and validate or refute.
I am committed to the pursuit of excellence in science, science education, writing, my career and in my interpersonal relationships.
I have written simulation systems software, civil engineering Modeling, CAD and Rebar Design software used in the construction of buildings, bridges and the construction of chemical weapons destruction facilities.
I do know something of software models of the real world.
I have written complex financial calculators used by large banks to manage, or mismanage as the case may be, vast sums of capital.
I know many computer languages from Assembly Language (that’s the actual binary instructions that make computers work) on up to very advanced object oriented computer languages. I am creating a very high level computer language.
I have designed innovative and sophisticated yet very simple Cellular Automata that was used in a commercial product to generate solutions guaranteed to produce a path through a complex maze. In Wolfram’s Cellular Automata nomenclature it’s an Eden Generator with a Simple Rule Pattern Matching Engine.
I question authority. Shamelessly. Boldly.
I have no invisible friends. I exist in objective reality and think that all my friends should too.
I am a freethinker who makes us of rational and critical thinking tools.
I value proven knowledge over faith, belief, delusions, dreams, possibilities that violate the laws of Nature, and consensus based thinking.
I am a human being.
I am willing to stand corrected about any facts in objective reality. If you find that something I’ve written can be shown to be factually incorrect please let me know and once verified I will correct it.
I am pwl aka pwvl.
Ask me questions. Tell me about you.
All the best,
Peter William Lount.