the economists can finally run a real-world experiment.

Welcome to the medium place. Have an ok time!

Welcome to the medium place. Have an ok time!

So skipping the trip to carhenge?

Mercury is right there.

The world is not just the US? Suppression of evidence would require a massive global conspiracy.

[er, actually, that might not be the best argument to make to conspiracy addled brains, including in US congress]

Recently met a baggage handler at PHX. Sounds like the airlines try their best to take care of them, but it's a tough gig in the summer.

I think it's also an economic and technological problem. The world needs to consume more energy. I've come to terms with recognizing that almost nobody is willing to sacrifice short-term economic development for the climate.

This looks pretty reasonable, and published on physics.org, sounds like a great site! Non-experts can't be expected to see the problems.

https://phys.org/news/2023-07-age-universe-billion-years-previously.html

I don't really blame non-experts on this. The way that we write and circulate press releases, and then the way they are adopted by (most) media, is often misleading and a disservice to science communication.

Sorry to hear that. I wonder if there were discrimination issues where dual-anon will help (not solve)? I have not yet submitted any paper anonymously, but am considering it in the future.

I think that there are problems with the field (especially extremely challenging problems in supporting early career researchers), I just don't think that this is one of them.

A Max Planck director can have a different profile than a Cambridge prof, a prof at Wesleyan, or a CNRS researcher. I think that this range actually facilitates science, since they all must take different approaches. Not all approaches are available to all of them, and that's ok.

I'd put biosignatures in here as well. It doesn't really get higher risk or higher reward. So many exoplanet atmosphere researchers are funded and exploring, each in their own ways, what biomarkers we might see, how we might detect it, and confounding variables.

Right! We *love* ideas that aren't the same old thing, only with 2x the sample size or 20% statistical improvements.

Pulsar Timing Array and Event Horizon Telescope, both extremely ambitious, costly, and *risky* experiments that required significant funding and coordination.

I feel like I'm usually a friendly person, or at least I hope I am, but I consider everyone else named "Greg" an enemy.