Let’s say that Person A says that he or she thinks that something is so.
Let us also accept that Person B disagrees with what Person A says.
Once upon a time, there would be a discussion, some reasoning, some logic, some research and maybe even a snarky comment or two. Ultimately though, for the most part, the facts of the matter would win out. Sure, some people would still cling to whatever person was incorrect, but it wasn’t a matter of life and death.
Over the last weeks, Person A, who made the discovery that he thinks is highly significant, wanted to let people know about his potentially significant discovery. So… he wrote the paper, submitted the research paper to the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences – and when the journal announced that it would publish it, the University he works with sent out a Press Release announcing the discovery.
Or… at least hinting at what the discovery might be. Or at least stirring the pot about what the discovery could possibly represent…
It set off a firestorm of argument, debate, furious Social Media postings, and even a text chat between myself and my favorite Paleontologist.
Notice something important here: ALL OF THIS WAS BEFORE WE EVEN KNEW WHAT THE PAPER SAID.
All of this over a bed of fossils that may or may not have been formed when an asteroid hit the Earth 65 Million years ago.
But there is a lesson in it for the rest of us…
Smithsonian Magazine has asked the question as to why there are fewer people studying history? There are any number of reasons why ranging from all the disciplines are ‘down” to people like me don’t want to pay a hostage ransom to get a piece of paper that says we know something. but history is deeply personal and meaningful to me. History isn’t just dates and places. It is people. It is seeking that connection with people, from as long ago as there were people right down to today…
An earthquake has hit Alaska
The Senate voted to end the US involvement in the war in Yemen. The weird part is that some people are surprised that five Senators had been lobbied by Saudi Arabia and voted against the resolution. The only question in my mind is how much the anti-Saudi folks paid for their lobbying efforts?