Show newer
Empiricism boosted

📣 Cool Job Alert 📣
Our friends over at EcoAgriculture Partners are hiring:

Director of Innovation in Landscape Management, EcoAgriculture

Basically, a role that promotes communities using the Integrated Landscape Management approach.

ecoagriculture.org/job/directo

#jobs #JobOpportunity #job #agriculture #conservation #sustainability

Empiricism boosted

“Since the Neolithic Revolution, an assortment of farming systems in Europe that relied heavily on monocultures and a handful of finicky staple crops often ended abruptly and violently. The diverse forest gardens of peasants, however, have quietly shrugged off ten thousand years of turbulent changes. This article is a look at the little-known history of these systems and their innovative strategies for survival.”
resilience.org/stories/2020-10
#Agriculture #Agroforestry

Empiricism boosted

“Climate action is the number one priority for major European cities, with 55% of mayors selecting it in new research – more than double any other category.”

“Eurocities, a collaborative network for European cities, surveyed 92 mayors in 28 European countries for its first annual Pulse survey.”

“After climate action, mayors ranked mobility (23%), economic recovery (20%), fighting inequalities (18%), and housing (15%) as most urgent.”

cities-today.com/climate-actio
#Urbanism #Climate

Empiricism boosted

24 hours of Earth's rotation, with the camera locked to the sky instead of the ground. We're all hanging out on this spinning rock.
Brilliant video by Bartosz Wojczyński. artuniverse.eu/gallery/190705- #nature #wonder #earth

Empiricism boosted

Whenever I see someone on one of these, I imagine they started out with a much larger vehicle and their journey has been riddled with a series of mishaps
#OldMememesNeverDie

@devonstrang @kim_harding

May of been? So you're not sure if the figures in the OP are accurate?

@godsouza

In a population of 1000 (chosen at random) people. Two fascists can produce a lot of social damage. In that population will be followers of fascism (e.g., if the money is right) & those that conform (out of fear) or simply ape-see-ape-do social (e.g., peer pressure)

The solution is to mitigate the 2 fascists (sociopaths) before all hell breaks loose.

In a population of 8 billion people.......

of personality differences

Often, the use of a common word in has been incorporated into the layfolk lexicon, but has a different meaning.

E.g., when layfolk hear scientists say, for example, "theory", they perceive that a theory is just an idea (because that's how they use the word. E.g., "l have a theory"). Some scientists use the term theory when in fact the concept they're discussing is a hypothesis (I.e., not a sufficient amount of supporting evidence for it to be a theory)

The of !

@kim_harding

The first thing l noticed is - show me the source of the data! If scientists don't adhere to basic referencing protocol, what chance is their for the layperson?

@devonstrang

They do like to talk ideas to death.

However, by natural selection had no foresight. Therefore, evolution can't be deterministic.

We certainly could use some fresh thinkers in the social media evolution \ academia scene.
But, Incorrect ideas tend to die out over a generational time frame (bad habits & incorrect ideas die out [in the scientific social scene])

The Dissenter: #787 Kennon Sheldon - Freely Determined; The New Psychology of the Self, and How to Live

Episode webpage: podcasters.spotify.com/pod/sho

Media file: anchor.fm/s/822ba20/podcast/pl

Empiricism boosted

The uncomfortable reality of life on Earth after we breach 1.5°C

Passing 1.5°C of global warming isn't just a political disaster, it will have dire consequences for us all, as those living on the front line already know

newscientist.com/article/mg258

#ClimateDiary

@cy

Rich people decision makers (generally those that are consuming more of the planet's resources. The business \ political influencers) keep pushing for technological "solutions" (market "solutions" related to their personal business transactions).

In summary, since decades ago, the status qou has been putting climate change off as a future problem. Those problems are now getting harder to mitigate.

If your aim is to be accurate & truthful, don't ask the opinion of those that will lose money if the evidence is widely known.

@oldmanmike

@dwnews_bot@mastodon.social

I'd argue that's because of ignorance regarding sex based differences & nurtured cultural (folk) in general.

But, what do l know, other than if folk aren't aware their bias is flawed thinking, they're not going to update their false priors.

Ignorance can spread faster than intelligence (e.g., on social media). The latter, intelligence (considered reasoning) takes more cognitive work (time \ effort)

So, social media has costs & benefits regarding the propagation of evidence or misinformation & disinformation.

@LouisePryor

Can computer music be sustainable? For example, music software users less resources than hardware.

New Books in Sound Studies: and Human Computer Interaction

Episode webpage: newbooksnetwork.com/category/p

Media file: traffic.megaphone.fm/NBN779211

Do you believe that people that breed dogs - select certain traits in a male & or female , and these traits can be passed into the pups?

Well, then, you believe in !

Learn about how humans of the past helped build the bond between us and our favorite furry friends. smithsonianmag.com/blogs/natio

@jmeosbn

Ok, no problem. We are evidently not in the same "headspace" (at the moment).

Have a pleasant day \ evening, etc.

@jmeosbn

Why would a general meaning be about you? (unless you were scientifically illiterate).

Populations of people have varying personalities (e.g., ethics). Science would mean they were more correct (than business-minded people)

Never mind!

Rearranging the deckchairs on the Titanic (& painting the Titanic green)

Generally, people think about what they want & need (proximate )

want to sustain their political popularity.

Rich people want to sustain their lifestyles more

Corporations (Businesses \ industries) want to sustain their business.

When in the history of , has an industry intentionally tried to go out of ?

The following quote is part revealing the truth (the business-as-usual agenda) and part (possibly ). To quote (aviation) "Because it’s new technologies and bringing proven solutions to scale that will deliver the emissions reductions we need, and protect the future of travel in the process,” Andrew Parker, Chief Sustainability Officer, Qantas Group.

How nice sounding, new "technologies" and "proven" "solutions" to "scale". Sounds like business-as-usual simply wants to protect it's ass(sets) and sell more stuff!

How about some fancy air respirators since are becoming as common as ignorant or misinformed salespeople?

What about clothing with an inbuilt refrigerator so the poor can try not to die during severe and prolonged heat waves?

Or perhaps the housing estates that are being built on floodplains can have lifeboats retrofitted?

The list of ways to make more money is endless. Well, at least until climate change causes the world economy to collapse. The idea of indefinite "growth" isn't only flawed thinking, it's really quite stupid (or is it simply a sales pitch?)

Evidently, the business-as-usual agenda is to continue to be in business. No industries openly ask, to paraphrase "Is it actually possible for our core business to be sustainable?" sustainabilitymag.com/articles (maybe they have a problem with being honest in public)

Seriously, they NEVER ask the important question! Can the business ever be sustainable? Of course, they're business people promoting their personal agendas (not considering all the variables, the evidence, the nature-based solutions).

The Qantas " " officer simply assumes that aviation is a must-have. As do many consumers. Of course, they do because that's simply what they want to believe - and that's why many industries are failing to be ecologically sustainable. Because they're not (period).

BusinessAsUsual caused

& saving

@jmeosbn

As a thought experiment. How would a government of general scientists be any different than a government of general business people?

For example, in general, at least a government of scientists would have a better idea of how things work. And scientists have a habit of being critical (peer review) of other scientists even for being accidentally wrong.

Why wouldn't a majority vote for a generally science-based government? Because the majority are not scientists?

Show older
Qoto Mastodon

QOTO: Question Others to Teach Ourselves
An inclusive, Academic Freedom, instance
All cultures welcome.
Hate speech and harassment strictly forbidden.