The DemystifySci Podcast

UCB biologist, Dr. Daniel Pauly on what breaks a scientific argument, the fate of your future seafood, and the limits of controlling one’s environment. This conversation with Dr. Pauly, spanned many topics - ecology, how change is simultaneously difficult yet necessary, the political situation on Earth, and the strange nature of the human animal. Somewhere in there, we even tried to reckon with the non-material aspects of biology, and how futile it is to treat humans as nothing more than a stack of inanimate atoms. But more than anything else, the trio circled around the tricky question of starting points in science. How can we navigate to an explanation, if we aren’t sure of the phenomenon itself? Take, for example, the Earth’s focus on the causal relationship between man-made CO2 and global temperatures. This assumption about carbon dioxide then leads scientists to the conclusion that reducing its emission will ultimately stabilize the climate. But what if Earthlings have made a mistake, and managing CO2 is a necessary - rather than sufficient condition, for maintaining the wellbeing of the planet? What if there are other, equally insidious threats to humans and their habitat, like pesticides, industrial waste, single-use plastics, or overconsumption? Currently, the conversation about carbon dioxide is totalizing, with only one correct answer - that industrial interventions are necessary to reduce carbon dioxide emissions, and that the planet’s climate must be stabilized and prevented from further change. This is one of those cases where getting where you want to go, rather than just getting somewhere, requires more than a mastery of logic. It also requires a careful evaluation of that first assumption - much like navigating by the north star requires actually knowing the north star. When our ability to correctly estimate a reliable starting point is compromised - either by time, politics, or belief - it becomes almost impossible to reach a robust conclusion about anything - whether it’s orienteering, the fate of the climate, or what to have for breakfast.  In the case of science, the systematic process by which we understand material existence, our conclusions can only be sturdy only if we start by considering all of the possibilities. If one refuses to consider a possibility because it complicates a political message or undermines a belief system, no amount of logic can lead to understanding.   Talk to us @DemystifySci  Read us and Wear us @  https://linktr.ee/demystifysci  Support us @ rb.gy/a7ueoz   ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Music: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~  Shilo Delay:  https://soundcloud.com/laterisgone

Dr. Milton Love on what he’s learned on his voyages into the unexplored depths of the deep, blue Pacific Ocean. ::!!:: Join the Demystifying Science mailing list ::!!:: http://eepurl.com/gRUCZL ::!!:: Milton - only his closest associates call him Dr. Love - has carried on an affair with the sea for most of his life. Unlike most love affairs, though, this one included nearly 15 years at 1,200’ below the surface of the waves in the Delta - a two person submarine. Though the Delta is long gone, converted to more flowerpot and less research facility, Milton is still hard at work. In addition to writing massive tomes with names like “Certainly More Than You Want to Know About Fishes of the Pacific Coast,” he’s published widely in his field, in popular magazine and, sometimes, he even does an experiment or two. Our conversation with him ranged from the role of observation versus theory in science, to how to be comfortable with uncertainty, to how true expertise requires constant revision. At the very end, he wraps it up succinctly: “A sustainable human future requires deep abiding respect for the oceans. Nature has an unlimited number of ways to end you or any lifeform.” Subscribe & like so we can keep bringing the best conversations!!! Audio-only version available at all usual podcast locations or here: https://anchor.fm/demystifying-science More readings from us: https://demystifyingscience.com/blog Let's talk! @DemystifySci Twitter: https://twitter.com/demystifysci Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/demystifysci Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/demystifysci ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Music: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Shilo Delay: https://soundcloud.com/laterisgone

Ebola vaccine developer, Dr. Gary Kobinger, talks COVID, asymptomatic carriers and the nature of viruses. Join the DemystifyingScience mailing list: http://eepurl.com/gRUCZL Dr. Kobinger is presently focused on non-profit production of a vaccine for the present pandemic. Professionally, he is best known for his role in the development of the first ebola vaccine, and ZMAPP, a monoclonal antibody treatment against the Ebolavirus. In addition to his biotechnology background, he’s got a pretty extensive teaching resume. He’s a professor at the universities of Pennsylvania and Manitoba, and at the University of Laval - where he serves as the Director of Infectious Disease Research. Our conversation covers all kinds of topics upon which Dr. Kobinger is uniquely qualified to ruminate. We talk about using gene therapies to treat diseases, how to leverage biology to cure sickness, the mysterious origin of viruses on Earth, the possibility of a non-profit approach to drug development, and the phenomenon of asymptomatic carriers. Subscribe & like so we can keep bringing the best conversations!!! Audio-only version available at all usual podcast locations or here: https://anchor.fm/demystifying-science More readings from us: https://demystifyingscience.com/blog Let's talk! @DemystifySci Twitter: https://twitter.com/demystifysci Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/demystifysci Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/demystifysci ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Music: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Shilo Delay: https://soundcloud.com/laterisgone

Micky & Quinn meet up with Dr. Brian McVeigh, an anthropologist and mental health counselor, who was once a student of Dr. Julian Jaynes. Jaynes developed the Theory of the Bicameral mind, which seeks to explain the evolution of conscious introspection in humanity. In other words, how did humans come to have a perception of themselves that could be abstracted - the I of the present, and the “me” of future action, cognition, and planning? Jaynes’ proposed that this shift happened as a result of the bronze age collapse of around 1200 BCE. Prior to this event, he suggests that humans experienced thought as auditory hallucinations, theophanies, which were assumed to be of divine provenience. In this perspective, ancient human thoughts were understood as the voice of Gods, which regularly appeared to people and helped them navigate decision making.When the bronze-age civilizations of the middle east ended, a new mentality emerged from the wreckage - a unicameral perspective where those voices were integrated into the Self. In this way, the voice that seems to create ideas and inspiration from thin air went from being the word of God to simply being a thought that belonged to the individual. In his recent work, “The Psychology of the Bible: explaining divine voices and visions” Dr. McVeigh adds a biblical hypothesis to the Jaynsian picture. He compares the wording in different chapters of the bible, written at different time periods, to illustrate how the voice of god receded from society over time. We also talked about the future evolution of consciousness in Humans and other animals on Earth, and how the destabilizing effect of an overwhelming information stream might precipitate radical adaptations - much like the Bronze Age Collapse did. Audio-only version available at all usual podcast locations or here: https://anchor.fm/demystifying-science Subscribe & like so we can keep bringing the best conversations!!! Support us and Dr. McVeigh when you grab his book: https://amzn.to/38K06W6 More readings from us: https://demystifyingscience.com/blog Join the DemystifyingScience mailing list:  http://eepurl.com/gRUCZL Let's talk!  @DemystifySci Twitter: https://twitter.com/demystifysci Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/demystifysci Facebook:  https://www.facebook.com/demystifysci ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Music: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Shilo Delay:  https://soundcloud.com/laterisgone

Hallucinations as an automatic signifier of mental illness is a surprisingly recent paradigm. Traditionally, hearing non-corporeal voices was viewed as a supernatural event, the realm of   religious prophets, ecstatic poets, and inspired painters. In those circumstances, hearing voices was viewed through the lens of divine inspiration, indicative of an active relationship with the metaphysical.   Today, auditory hallucinations are often sensationalized into a non-normative pathology, a situation where the response to even a mildest case is often tinged with fear - of violence, of contagion, of impurity.  In these conditions, the deep, spiritual significance of the event is devalued, the meaning erased.   Our guest today, the writer and scholar Daniel Smith, is here to talk about the ideas in his book – Muses, Madmen, and Prophets: Hearing Voices and The Borders of Sanity. The book is an exploration of the dual nature of hallucinations, heavily inspired by the Bicameral Mind Theory of Julian Jaynes. Centered, also, is Smith's own experience - while his father lived “terrorized by the thought of what might happen if he revealed his voices,” his grandfather consulted his for "picking horses at the track and beating retirees at gin rummy."   Our conversation with Mr. Smith runs the gamut. We explore non-normative conscious experience, moral choice, optimism vs. pessimism, and the prevalence of loneliness in the modern milieu, and the evolutionary role that auditory hallucinations might still play.  Audio-only version available at all usual podcast locations or here: https://anchor.fm/demystifying-science Subscribe & like so we can keep bringing the best conversations!!!  Support us and Daniel when you nab his book: https://amzn.to/37gPRrq More readings from us: https://demystifyingscience.com/blog Join the DemystifyingScience mailing list:  http://eepurl.com/gRUCZL Let's talk!  @DemystifySci Twitter: https://twitter.com/demystifysciInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/demystifysciFacebook:  https://www.facebook.com/demystifysci~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Music: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Shilo Delay:  https://soundcloud.com/laterisgone

What if the day comes that humans need to make massive, intentional changes to the earth in order to ensure the survival of the species? Perhaps the solar radiation from the sun increases, or the orbits of the planets shift, or greenhouse gases accumulate to fatal levels. These changes could result in the kind of intense warming that happened during the cretaceous, when palm frond and freshwater ferns dominated the polar landscapes. According to some, the best strategy for avoiding this kind of cataclysmic change is to, quite literally, block out the sun.  It sounds risky, pre-apocalyptic, and almost hubristic. Who are these humans who think on a planetary scale, and refuse to turn away from the challenge of engineering the atmosphere? Our guest today, Harvard professor Dr. David Keith, is an illustrative example of the field. While he studies what sorts of interventions could be used to turn down the intensity of incident solar radiation, in the next breath he’ll be the first to suggest that perhaps spraying sulfuric acid, aluminum, titanium, or diamond dust into the atmosphere isn’t a very good idea.   Our conversation covers all aspects of solar geoengineering. The state of the field, the incentives for developing systems that can change global climates, the likelihood of private actors taking matters into their own hands, and much more.   Subscribe & like so we can keep bringing the best conversations!!!  More readings from us: https://demystifyingscience.com/blog Join the DemystifyingScience mailing list:  http://eepurl.com/gRUCZL Let's talk!  @DemystifySci Twitter: https://twitter.com/demystifysciInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/demystifysciFacebook:  https://www.facebook.com/demystifysci~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Music: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Shilo Delay:  https://soundcloud.com/laterisgone

A conspiracy is defined by shadowy actors acting in secret to do bad things, and is an unfortunate consequence of geopolitics. Conspiracy theories, on the other hand, are ways of explaining reality that lean heavily on this kind of behind-the-scenes cabal as a mechanism for just about everything. They’re often marred by a lack of evidence, or over-extension of evidence, despite the fervent belief of their adherents. Sometimes conspiracy theories prove out over time, however: CIA mind-control, government assassinations, pretexts for foreign wars, human experimentation, etc.. Humans appear to be living through a golden age of conspiracy theories, with alternative explanations available for everything from wars, to weather, to gun control, to the Beatles. Despite the shaky foundations of many of these theories, our guest Mick West has found that they often have extraordinary staying power.  Mick started talking to conspiracy theorists when he encountered the idea of chemtrails while studying for his pilot’s license. He figured a well-placed scientific presentation would lay the matter to rest - but ten years on, he’s still at it. He’s since expanded his topic-set to Q-anon, UFOs, and started several websites dedicated to conspiracy-debunking. Our conversation ultimately sought means of productively discussing alternatives to established narratives.  Subscribe & like so we can keep bringing the best conversations!!! Podcast version available at all usual locations: https://anchor.fm/demystifying-science Mick West: http://mickwest.com/ Metabunk: https://www.metabunk.org/home/ Contrail Science: https://contrailscience.com/ Mr West's academic collaboration: https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10... Support us and Mr. West when you buy his book: https://amzn.to/3l9HqUs More readings from us: https://demystifyingscience.com/blog Join the DemystifyingScience mailing list: http://eepurl.com/gRUCZL Let's talk! @DemystifySci Twitter: https://twitter.com/demystifysci Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/demystifysci Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/demystifysci ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Music: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Shilo Delay: https://soundcloud.com/laterisgone

When the world seems like it’s moving too fast for comfort, how do you make decisions? Is it a random walk towards an uncertain future? Is it fear based? Is it by gradually whittling down the set of possibilities to the absolute best option, given what you know now? Is it based on some prediction of what the future might hold?   Chances are, it’s a mixture of all of the above, given the circumstances in which you’re making the choice. Our conversation with L.A Paul, a professor of philosophy and cognitive science at Yale University explores the ways in which humans come to make up their minds when facing high-stakes transformative hurdles.  She also thinks a lot about the effect that those decisions have on our existence in general.   We consider what it means to choose while embracing uncertainty - and how our relationship to this discomfort can be tempered by a deeper understanding of the ways that rationality and morality overlap.  Subscribe & like so we can keep bringing the best conversations!!!  Podcast version available at all usual locations: https://anchor.fm/demystifying-science  L. A. Paul: https://lapaul.org  Support us and Paul when you buy her book: https://amzn.to/3ehovVl  More readings from us: https://demystifyingscience.com/blog  Join the DemystifyingScience mailing list:  http://eepurl.com/gRUCZL  Let's talk!  @DemystifySci Twitter: https://twitter.com/demystifysci Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/demystifysci Facebook:  https://www.facebook.com/demystifysci ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Music: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Shilo Delay:  https://soundcloud.com/laterisgone

The future does not happen on it’s own - it is born of the narrative that humans create for themselves. Historically, this has been the domain of science fiction authors and filmmakers like Ray Bradbury, Isaac Asimov, and Gene Rodenberry. However, in recent years, fantasies about potential human futures have become much more democratic. For this week’s episode we talk to Isaac Arthur, a futurist who has spent the last eight years thinking, studying, writing and making media about the future. On his YouTube channel, Science and Futurism with Isaac Arthur, he presentes detailed analyses of the past in order to get a better understanding of what the future holds. He brings a unique optimism to the discussion of what will come on Earth and beyond, what works and what doesn’t in democracy, and the best ways for humans to tinker with their institutions. Our conversation explores these ideas but also examines the effects of increased population density, heightened information connectivity, and interplanetary travel on human civilization. Subscribe & like so we can keep bringing the best conversations!!! Podcast version available at all usual locations: https://anchor.fm/demystifying-science Isaac Arthur:  https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCZFipeZtQM5CKUjx6grh54g More readings from us: https://demystifyingscience.com/blog Join the DemystifyingScience mailing list:  http://eepurl.com/gRUCZL Let's talk!  @DemystifySci Twitter: https://twitter.com/demystifysci Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/demystifysci Facebook:  https://www.facebook.com/demystifysci ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Music: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Shilo Delay:  https://soundcloud.com/laterisgone/come-back-tomorrow-feat-kristian-hochreiter

Is blockchain going to be the technology that changes everything? Will it help us trust again? Will it revolutionize the relationship of people to their government? David Robison, cryptocurrency trader and blockchain enthusiast, suggests that it can be used to secure elections, supply chains, and the means of production. He believes in the potential of blockchain to such a degree that he recently renounced his US citizenship and moved to Fort Galt, a libertarian community in Southern Chile where crypto is king. We start our conversation with the basics - what is blockchain, bitcoin, and cryptocurrency? What can these technologies do for a society? We talk about the hurdles to blockchain implementation, and explore the persistent utility of fiat currency, the accelerating necessity for global stewardship, and the perception of democracy abroad. Pew Research on World perception of Democracy mentioned by Quinn: https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank... Subscribe & like so we can bring you more conversations!!! Podcast version available at all usual locations: https://anchor.fm/demystifying-science More readings from us: https://demystifyingscience.com/blog Join the DemystifyingScience mailing list: http://eepurl.com/gRUCZL Let's talk! @DemystifySci Twitter: https://twitter.com/demystifysci Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/demystifysci Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/demystifysci ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Music: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Shilo Delay: https://soundcloud.com/laterisgone