Human Livestock: PhD As A Lifestyle Choice

American colleges are more like drug dealers than Chinacrap factories. They aren’t dumping bad product into an artificially inflated market; they’re feeding appetites that will always be lucrative but never should be indulged.

Consider that there have been far too many PhDs chasing academic slots for well over a decade. These are Smart(tm) people, right? Why do they persist in getting advanced education, when they see and know that their future employment prospects are dismal? The answer is, they’re weak men who want to be institutionalized, yet respectably. They actively want to be micromanaged. Get in the pod, eat the bugs, welcome the invader, marry your dog… Just do what you’re told and you won’t get hurt.

Some people really are like that.

Whether because the student is too emotionally damaged to face reality, or is merely female… this is the female nesting instinct on steroids… the student is the driving force behind academia-as-a-lifestyle. Instead of facing hardships, or worse, uncertainty & risk, they choose a career that… while guaranteed to be underpaid and unrewarding if not totalitarian nihilistic… will at least guarantee, with all the force of government, that the student will never starve.

Until he DOES starve, of course. Weak people trusting the government is like pigs trusting the farmer.

Academics pursue PhDs only because they’re too cool for Skid Row. They can’t handle life. They don’t care that the odds of tenure are nil, or that the price of tenure is a soul that they don’t believe they have. They want the air-conditioned livestock pen at any price, which unfortunately, is where the globalists got the idea for a Great Reset.

The other nine males “make the system work”. AKA McNuggets. But don’t worry, you’ll be The One because… reasons.

I Left Out the Full Truth to Get My Climate Change Paper Published

h ttps://www.thefp.com/p/i-overhyped-climate-change-to-get-published

By Patrick T. Brown, 5 September 2023

Why would he do that? Because he’s… CHICKEN.

I am a climate scientist. And while climate change is an important factor affecting wildfires over many parts of the world, it isn’t close to the only factor that deserves our sole focus.

So why does the press focus so intently on climate change as the root cause? Perhaps for the same reasons I just did in an academic paper about wildfires in Nature, one of the world’s most prestigious journals: it fits a simple storyline that rewards the person telling it.

This worthless academic is going to talk a lot about how PRESTIGIOUS journals constantly tell lies to promote their political agenda. One wonders what, exactly, makes them prestigious. In this article, the author describes how “prestigious” means “the government will fund you only if you have PRESTIGIOUS approval”. I’ll be skipping that part because I deal in souls, not funding grants.

The paper I just published—“Climate warming increases extreme daily wildfire growth risk in California”—focuses exclusively on how climate change has affected extreme wildfire behavior. I knew not to try to quantify key aspects other than climate change in my research because it would dilute the story that prestigious journals like Nature and its rival, Science, want to tell.

That word again.

This matters because it is critically important for scientists to be published in high-profile journals… In many ways, they are the gatekeepers for career success in academia… The editors of these journals have made it abundantly clear, both by what they publish and what they reject, that they want climate papers that support certain preapproved narratives—even when those narratives come at the expense of broader knowledge for society.

A scientist would ask why they are so committed to a path of easily provable falsehoods. An academic would take the the money and do the deed, then complain that he feels violated the morning after.

As the number of researchers has skyrocketed in recent years—there are close to six times more PhDs earned in the U.S. each year than there were in the early 1960s—it has become more difficult than ever to stand out from the crowd. So while there has always been a tremendous premium placed on publishing in journals like Nature and Science, it’s also become extraordinarily more competitive.

That’s NOT the fault of the Regime. It doesn’t care where its lies come from. If you make yourself available then they’ll use you. It’s true that kings want everybody reduced to pawns, but it’s also true that natural-born pawns demand a king. They will not live free even when given the chance.

“I want to tell the truth but it would hurt my career. I shouldn’t have to make that choice!” Behold the materialist conscience: they know you’re evil, they hate your evil, but the only alternative is courage & honor.

I suddenly realized why the moneychangers print those diplomas on “sheepskin”. 10/10 Black knight trolling!

In theory, scientific research should prize curiosity, dispassionate objectivity, and a commitment to uncovering the truth. Surely those are the qualities that editors of scientific journals should value.

In reality, though, the biases of the editors (and the reviewers they call upon to evaluate submissions) exert a major influence on the collective output of entire fields. They select what gets published from a large pool of entries, and in doing so, they also shape how research is conducted more broadly. Savvy researchers tailor their studies to maximize the likelihood that their work is accepted. I know this because I am one of them.

Here’s how it works.

You send them a selfie of your Brazilian butt-jobbed booty, pumped bulgingly full of credentials, then they give you money and bend you over a dumpster in a dark alley. You then give half the money to your pimp while complaining he’s not giving you a choice.

Maybe there’s a better way to live. Nah. You already know more about ‘plumbing problems’ than those tradesmen ever will. !Science!

The first thing the astute climate researcher knows is that his or her work should support the mainstream narrative—namely, that the effects of climate change are both pervasive and catastrophic and that the primary way to deal with them is not by employing practical adaptation measures like stronger, more resilient infrastructure, better zoning and building codes, more air conditioning—or in the case of wildfires, better forest management or undergrounding power lines—but through policies like the Inflation Reduction Act, aimed at reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

Correct. The first thing the astute climate researcher knows is the Golden Rule of Art & Science: whoever has the gold, makes the rules.

Actually, that’s not true. The greats of Art & Science rarely died wealthy. Their work was more important to them than a life of comfort and, sometimes, of life.

So in my recent Nature paper, which I authored with seven others…

It’s not that the research was that hard. It’s that the industry prestige is that limited.  Pro-tip to you, Doc Brown: All seven of your collaborators ALSO hate themselves for lying about their work in order to gain respect.

Does your conscience hurt? It’s supposed to hurt in this situation. I want to see whether you think the problem is your evil, or your evil-detector.

FIND. HONEST. WORK.

…I focused narrowly on the influence of climate change on extreme wildfire behavior. Make no mistake: that influence is very real. But there are also other factors that can be just as or more important, such as poor forest management and the increasing number of people who start wildfires either accidentally or purposely. (A startling fact: over 80 percent of wildfires in the US are ignited by humans.)

In Greece today, it’s over 99 percent. In fact, authorities there just arrested 79 arsonists… and over 200 arrests for ‘negligence’… but refused to identify any of them. I investigated and discovered that migrants are setting fires in order to distract local law enforcement from arresting them, which means the globalists are trying to stop their own allies from burning down their own homes & families, without exposing themselves as allies of arsonists.

Ah, consequences. Often delayed, never denied.

I left academia over a year ago, partially because I felt the pressures put on academic scientists caused too much of the research to be distorted. Now, as a member of a private nonprofit research center, The Breakthrough Institute, I feel much less pressure to mold my research to the preferences of prominent journal editors and the rest of the field.

Ohhh, he DID find honest work. Alright then, he gets some respect.

You might be wondering at this point if I’m disowning my own paper. I’m not.

YOINK! I take it back.

On the contrary, I think it advances our understanding of climate change’s role in day-to-day wildfire behavior. It’s just that the process of customizing the research for an eminent journal caused it to be less useful than it could have been.

He silenced his evil-detector by blaming what other people did instead of what he did. Doc Brown is still all blah blah anthropogenic climate change; he just doesn’t understand why the only accepted, prestigious solution is totalitarian government control of all humanity.

He never will, either, because his chosen lifestyle is chicken.