Your Glorified Ignorance Wasn't Cool Then, And Your Scientific Illiteracy Isn't Cool Now

The social lessons we learn early on are very simple: if you want to be part of the cool crowd, you can't appear too exceptional. You can't be too knowledgeable, too academically successful, or too smart. Someone who knows more, is more successful, or smarter than you is often seen as a threat, and so we glorify ignorance as the de facto normal position. But ignorance isn't normal at all. Choosing to remain ignorant harms your development as a child, but harms the world as an adult.

But ignorance isn't normal at all. Choosing to remain ignorant harms your development as a child, but harms the world as an adult.

What are you cleverly disguising and implying...

as ignorance being a ruler to too many without a place to park their Zeppelin in the yard, as

there is no parking meter, is a measurement of the degradation trip we keep taking, as they sneakily tied our velcronshoes together with taped laced with LSD, but spelled differently than how it's pronounced, cause denying facts has become the new Abbey Normal Dr. Fraunken steeen pronounces without cutting his tongue sten on steel stolen by non ferrous ones, unattracted or drawn to the truth they refuse to accept as a savior, sew the stitch together a fragmented interpretation of an artificuial reality that so many cntinue to see,

as so many others just can't believe what it is they witness, but it IS OCCURING,

and this Occurancy shouldn't be used to buy what can, teach what then they wish perceived buy the deceived bought up by a GOP that is built for just that, though unjustly.

Both parties are no surprise, but won has much more forUS to LOSE

Good Seed that won't germinate due to an infection caused by an election brought forth by a Russian Design, yet, so many are just fine

WTF happened to AMERICA              FCK Ignorance Ruling       it makes for stupidity that deserves not pity, 

just a remedy, known as THE TRUTH           People need to try and find it     Now more than ever   in my humble opine

1. Good Seed that won't germinate due to...

Exactly!

And sometimes the seed won't germinate because of where its where its  sown-- for example if it falls on very dry or otherwise inhospitable ground. (See, for example, Matthew 13):

That same day Jesus went out of the house and sat beside the sea.

³ And he told them many things in parables, saying: “Listen! A sower went out to sow.  ⁴ And as he sowed, some seeds fell on the path, and the birds came and ate them up.  ⁵ Other seeds fell on rocky ground, where they did not have much soil, and they sprang up quickly, since they had no depth of soil.  ⁶ But when the sun rose, they were scorched; and since they had no root, they withered away.  ⁷ Other seeds fell among thorns, and the thorns grew up and choked them. 

⁸ Other seeds fell on good soil and brought forth grain, some a hundredfold, some sixty, some thirty.  ⁹ Let anyone with ears listen!” 

there is no parking meter,

And the pumps don't work cause the vandals took the handles!

N.B:

(Pawking metaws: 1:31

Vandals & all the handles:  2:04)

we glorify ignorance as the de facto normal position

I believe this has to do with laziness and a lack of curiosity often found in many indoctrinated believers. They are told everything is known already as a child, this God made you, loves you and all you have to do is what your Church tells you to do and you'll be saved. And while God is mysterious, there aren't any real mysteries left because one answer solves them all, "God did it".

This lack of curiosity goes hand in hand with ignorance. It's far easier to just say "I believe the earth is 9,000 years old because the bible tells me so" than to go out and do the research to try and prove a theory. And doing the research also means you might spend all that time and effort only to prove your theory wrong. Scientists do it all the time. Sadly, religious pseudoscience refuses to amend their theories regardless of how often they are proved wrong

And for a long time it was easier for smokers to believe the tobacco company lies than to do the work overcoming their addiction, even though in the back of their minds they knew it was killing them. Today, for many it's easier to believe the fossil fuel industry lies that AGW global climate change is a hoax than to change their dirty non-renewable fuel habits.

Those who claim to know everything already are most often the ones who know the least. The belief in their own invented knowledge and general lack of curiosity creates self-assured morons like our current President who thinks we should blow up hurricanes with nuclear weapons, that wind turbines give people cancer, that if you can buy a box of cereal then you have a voter ID, that humans have a finite amount of energy that we don't want to use up too quickly, that the world trade center towers only burned because we removed all the asbestos, that LED efficient light bulbs cause cancer or that the F35 stealth fighter is literally invisible. This lack of curiosity and mental laziness is what I believe has led to so many glorifying ignorance, which I suppose is fitting in this age of "alternative facts".

I believe this has to do with laziness and a lack of curiosity often found in many indoctrinated believers.

I agree--- I would think that any truly curious person wouldn't fall for these nonsensical beliefs.

Incidentally it seems that whenever the topic of thinking rationally ("scientifically") comes up on social media, its implied that  the main trait of a truly rational, scientific person is that they only believe what's scientifically been proven. That the best scientists are characterized primarily by "thinking rationally", by believing only what's been"proven" to be true..

I would disagree-- IMO the most important trait of a good scientist is-- intense curiousity. And if anything, rather thsan being bound by convention, the best scientists are the ones who constantly challenge "conventional wisdom"-- people who"Think Different".

(Buzz-- the video is an old Apple Computer commercial entitled "Think Different")

Those who claim to know everything already are most often the ones who know the least.

I've seen that sooo often!

Show me a conversation where the participants are extremely ignorant about what they're talking about...and I'll show you a typical social media site!

(And almost all of them think are think they're experts....on everything!)

Ironic that I catch this seed and your comment after something I saw on the TV morning show I watch. This local channel does a "Verify" segment once a week and this morning's topic was about "X-Mas". The anchor explained that the X in Xmas should not offend anyone because it is the Greek word for "Christ" and that Christmas is really just a shortened word for "Christ's Mass". The Xmas version has been around for 1000 years or better.

After watching this, I pretty much decided that the people who are offended by Xmas are just ignorant, lazy people who don't read.

I hope they do a segment on "Holiday"

After watching this, I pretty much decided that the people who are offended by Xmas are just ignorant, lazy people who don't read.

i was too lazy to read about how offensive my X Mass ignorance has become, so i must ask Y Mass in counters aren't takien for granite, and why is ignorance so damn prevalent on this planet  ?

After watching this, I pretty much decided that the people who are offended by Xmas are just ignorant, lazy people who don't read.

There are a lot of people who are continually looking for some sort of extremely trivial thing to be offended about....

I know that Gal Gadot is hot. Not sure I know anything else for a fact. 

I'll second that emotion.

Thanks for that. I find myself staring into her eyes.

It's an improvement over that ad for Asian women this site keeps showing me.

Nope she's staring into mine (my story and I'm sticking to it).

"...that ad for Asian women..."

Did you ever consider that there are some members of this site who would resent that remark?

Buzz, nobody insulted Asian women.  The ads are what they are.

Buzz,

He is not kidding. There is an ad for Asian women to marry. 

Did you ever consider that there are some members of this site who would resent that remark?

The ad says "sexy Asian women in *insert your town* looking for men over 35"

Why don't I see it?  Is it because of where I am?  I get the brainberries stuff, but I've never seen a dating site ad here.

Is it because of where I am?

I would assume so.  I see the same ads, usually for Asian women, sometimes for Russian women, and they all mention my town.  If I log on while I'm at my parents' house, the Asian and Russian women who apparently are waiting to marry me (a straight gal, BTW) have followed me to their town.  Your ISP or government likely doesn't allow the ads, but they show up for US users.

Yea, well these damn ladies have been stalking me.

When every where you look you see these adds, but they don't ADD up, it makes one wonder if bred to be ADD  Ed

up while subtracting to the female mail ordered brides that via bribes, Melania is here today with that mental midget wrestling with his SUB conscience cause he'd again mentioned how he was going to follow up on her immigration(Allegedly legal) status.

Sorta like those tax returns he'd said he was going to release,

and say that Mexican Check for that Wall, 

but i digress, cause i know of a few who have married illegals, only to be used for them to gain citizen status.

My apology.  You must have referred to an ad that is not shown where I am, a dating site ad.  I thought you meant the ads that refer to Asian movie stars or why Asian women do not seem to age, etc.

m.imgur

Just did some research into Gal. 

Martial art instructor.

Expert rating with many weapons.

Served 2 years in the Israel Defense Forces with honor.

Earned a law degree.

Crowned Miss Israel.

Movie actress, model, director and producer.

And I thought that I was a Renaissance guy.

She is the epitome of a Renaissance 'Gal'.

I can't open your link.  If you want me to see it you have to copy and paste whatever it is.

I knew that she was a Miss Israel, and that she didn't have to train for the fighting parts in her movies - because of her IDF training she was already competent.  The only person I previously considered to be a "Renaissance" woman was Alanis Obomsawin. 

Alanis did it young. Are you Canadian?

Actually, Gal trained very hard for her role as Wonder Women.

Fake fighting is actually harder than real fighting. 

Alanls did it young and is STILL doing it with her documentaries. 

You could be about the only active NT member who doesn't know I'm a Canadian.  There could be one or two other active Canadian members on this site.  

Thanks for the info about training for fake fighting - I didn't know that.

You don't think movie stars kill each other on a regular basis do you? It's fun being a stuntman. Although I haven't taken a fall or a punch in many years. 

I posted an article about stunt men (and women) on the Everyone Loves Movies group.

Remember to listen and be open to learning. The future of our civilization may hang in the balance.

I hesitate to bring up instances, but, there are subjects that require a basic understanding of science to accept, yet some flatly refuse to even consider looking at an issue from a scientific standpoint, prefering to wallow in ignorance because their thin fabric of reality will be ripped apart by science.  

Science isn't an opinion.

Science isn't a religion. 

Science doesn't have a political agenda.

Period. 

I hesitate to bring up instances

I'd be willing to bet that you and I (and several others) have the same instances in mind.

True, was just trying to avoid an OT flag.

Understood.

Science isn't an opinion.

Science isn't a religion. 

Science doesn't have a political agenda.

That's true-- of real Science.

But there are some people who will use their own irrational prejudices, beliefs, and opinons to subvert their science, Deliberately! (And in some cases not deliberately).who 

For example, the Scientific researcher in a university (or in a private research lab),-- in order to get a grant from a wealthy benefactor or organization that has an agenda. (I've known academicians who will distort their findings for the almighty dollar. (To get grant money).

It would be nice if everyone in the world was basically honest-- but its naive to think so.

Ot an individual Scientist who will "fudge" the results of experiments in order to prove some bias or opinion or belief. Some dishonest individuals do this deliberately, but perhaps even more problematic are those who are honest-- but on some level they may be unaware of take actions that may distort results. (Incidentally competent people in the field are quite aware of this-- in certain types of experiments they go to great lengths to design things to avoid this)

There are subjects that require a basic understanding of math to accept, yet some flatly refuse to even consider looking at an issue from a mathematical standpoint, preferring to wallow in ignorance because their thin fabric of reality will be ripped apart by math.  

Math isn't an opinion.

Math isn't a religion. 

Math doesn't have a political agenda.

If one can accurately produce a mathematical model for some aspect of reality then that usually leads to the best approximation of truth.   

Thing is, not everyone wants to discover truth.   Some (many?) want to simply hold to the 'truth' they desire.   In these cases even a PhD in mathematics is not going to make a difference.

As you mentioned in another discussion here, there's a useful term for that:  "Confirmation Bias"..

But people only see what they want to see. Some people are passionate about learning the facts-- the real truth about any particular thing. Other will selectively sort through information and only accept that which validates their pre-existing biases.

When someone has a strong emotional attachment to a particular belief, no amount of evidence to the contrary will sway tham!

(Which has always made me wonder-- why do so many people on social media sites spend so much time and effort try to win "true believers" over to seeing-- and accepting-- the actual facts?

(Which has always made me wonder-- why do so many people on social media sites spend so much time and effort try to win "true believers" over to seeing-- and accepting-- the actual facts?

There's a wise old saying:

If you're gonna push on a rock-- push on one that moves!

If one can accurately produce a mathematical model for some aspect of reality then that usually leads to the best approximation of truth.

You make it sound more complicated than it is.

I'm talking about understanding the simple things....like the difference between millions and trillions.  

I'm talking about understanding the simple things....like the difference between millions and trillions.  

yea, and some people have zero (s) understanding of such

That's a seed all by itself. 

I was making a point about mathematics itself since that is the term you used.

Yes it is a shame that many have problems even at the level of arithmetic.

Some of the ways this manifests in society might seem like low-stakes affairs that aren't worth much effort. Maybe you laugh when you hear about  a rapper claiming the Earth is flat . Or  a basketball player saying we never landed on the Moon . Or  at the 25% of the population who thinks the Sun orbits the Earth . But it's not laughable; it's something we should all be ashamed of .

Ashamed of indeed!   

There is no excuse for this kind of stubborn ignorance.  Like insisting that biochemical evolution is a worldwide conspiracy of godless scientists.    But people actually believe this nonsense.   And it does not help that there are organization such as Answers In Genesis, Discover Institute, etc. using all their resources to push nonsense into the minds of the next generation and to the naïve.

Mmmmhmmmmm.

Excellent seed Sandy.

Thank you.

But people actually believe this nonsense. 

Part of the problem is, they prefer to go by only belief and not evidence or facts.

 And it does not help that there are organization such as Answers In Genesis, Discover Institute, etc. using all their resources to push nonsense into the minds of the next generation and to the naïve.

Or pushing stupidity onto the willfully ignorant, who in turn promote them and their brand of stupidity.

There are a fair number of people who actually believe that the luna landing never happened-- its a hoax. And as with most conspiracies, the conspiracy nuts come up with incredibly detailled and very elaborate "proof" of why.

And then, of course, there are all sorts of bizarre theories  about 9/11.

Are you familiar wit h the "Snopes" website? 

That is exactly right.   The very idea that there are people who actually believe that Earth is flat and who actively argue against science just blows my mind.   It shows that our brains can cause some of us to grasp hold of an idea and never let it go no matter how thoroughly it is shown to be wrong. 

And then, of course, there are all sorts of bizarre theories  about 9/11. Are you familiar wit h the "Snopes" website? 

I just took a quick look at it. Shortly after 9/11 they had several pages of 9/11 hoaxes-- therer were tons of 'em. But now it seems they picked just a few-- interesting stuff!

The Sept. 11, 2001, Terrorist Attacks on the U.S.

Those attacks against the U.S. changed history and, unfortunately, inspired many to attempt to rewrite it.

(LINK)

P.S: In the period immediately after the 9/11 attacks, I've had numerous occasions of people who believed some of these conspiracies tell their favourite onne to me-- often arguing vigorously that one or more 9/11 hoaxes were true. hoax was actually fact.

Of course . . . ya never know!

Anyone ever see this picture before?

That is exactly right.   The very idea that there are people who actually believe that Earth is flat and who actively argue against science just blows my mind.   It shows that our brains can cause some of us to grasp hold of an idea and never let it go no matter how thoroughly it is shown to be wrong. 

Actually I have a theory as why this phenomenon developed-- it was via evolution.

This is rather long and a bit complex, so I'm not necessarily recommending anyone read it all).

And no-- you don't have to know this!

-Have you ever wondered what is the purpose of evolution? Is it just the result of a Yuge number of random events-- or is there some higher purpose to it? (BTW I am not trying to prove the existence of any "God" or  "Higher Power" by this, so let's not go there .:

But my guess is that's its more than just random changes.

My theory is  that as you go higher and higher up the Phylogenetic Scale (I believe that's the correct term?) more and more sophisticated (more complex).adaptations occur.  "The purpose" of these is to better the chances of survival of the species. (Not the individual..). The purpose of that is so that they can pass on their DNA...

With the lower forms of life the adaptations are primarily physical--- the higher you go up the scale, however, the changes are more and more in the nervous system, (and less with gross physical changes).

(Cont'd in next comment)

(cont'd from comment # 3, 3, 4)

And remember, my theory states that the purpose of these change (via evolution) is to ensure the survival. So as more advanced nervous systems evolved, they evolved for one purpose-- to help in survival. 

So the human brain "knows" that it ultimate goal is to aid in survival.  And somehow the brain has developed the "belief' that by understanding the world it can navigate it-- even to some degree control it!

But life is a mystery. (Why do innocent people suffer so often?). Trying to figure out how the Universe works is difficult-- it can even be disorienting. So in order to try to understand the Universe-- the brain develops a set of beliefs to explain it.

These form a belief system-- religious, scientific, political, etc.The human brain believes the belief system is necessary to survive.

So if a someone is try to "kill" the belief system (by challenging the ideas) the brain believes that person is actually trying to kill the organism. (because the brain mistakenly believes on some level that the belief system is the organism! )

So if someone tries to eliminate your belief system-- your brain believe they are actually trying to kill you! (Which is why some folks defend their belief systems as if their life was actually threatened-- instead of it being merely your belief system that's threatened).

OF COURSE ALL OF THIS COULD BE WRONG!

On this comment I will say that I do not think there is a purpose in evolution.   The process itself is certainly not based on purpose.   But while some think evolution is the tool of a sentient entity who has a purpose, I remain unconvinced due to the lack of evidence.

I think that people resist disruption to their belief system because they fear the disruption — they do not want to lose the comfort that their belief provides and are afraid of the unknown that exists outside of the safe confines of their belief system.

I have seen the picture before and as I recall it was a hoax.

 But while some think evolution is the tool of a sentient entity who has a purpose, I remain unconvinced due to the lack of evidence.

Bur are you therefore also convinced that there definitely isn't a purpose?

No, I just see nothing that suggests there is a purpose (as in sentient intent).   

So I see no evidence of purpose but that does not mean there is no purpose.   

I have seen the picture before and as I recall it was a hoax.

Yes. It purports to be an actual photo of a tourist on top of the WTC moments before the plane hit.(The plane is viiable in the background). 

It was Photoshopped. The details of the hoax, and the identity of tourist is available (on the 'Net if you google it I have seen the picture before and as I recall it was a hoax. -- the most common name for the photo is "Tourist Guy".

. Also, it spawned numerous variations:

The fascinating thing about "Tourist Guy" was that it spread like wildfire-- numerous people were emailing it to people! And it was amazing to me how many people were sure it was real!

Well, I agnostic about it.

But there does seem to be (possibly?) a purpose to Evolution-- the purpose being for life forms to survive in order to pass on their DNA. (Of course that's not been proven, and even if it was, it raises the question of "Why? What if anything is the reason for passing on DNA-- or is there one? Maybe all tha change is indeed random, and the passing on of DNA is merely an unintended by-product of Evolution.)

Also it would seem that there is a purpose to Evolution-- to have life evolve more and more towards "higher" (more complex) forms.

But if that is true-- why?

And could it possibly be that the purpose is to have life evolve so that they are all  eventually become "God"?  or "Gods"?

But if one believes that "God" already exists-- why the need to have life forms evolve towards becoming more "Gods"-- wouldn't that be overly redundent?

... the purpose being for life forms to survive ...

The word 'purpose' implies sentient intent.   Evolution certainly has a critical dynamic.   The process perpetuates only if the individuals survive and reproduce.   So only those individuals whose genetics are best suited to survive and reproduce will pass their genes onto the next generation.   This natural selection by the environment (coupled with the mutations that produce genetic variability) is what we call evolution.

Because evolution results in new species that can best survive in the changing environment one might argue that this is the 'purpose' of evolution, but I would argue it is simply a necessary characteristic of this unguided biochemical process.

Also it would seem that there is a purpose to Evolution-- to have life evolve more and more towards "higher" (more complex) forms.

Nowadays we cannot trust any digital picture.    Worse, this has now grown to the video world.   It is now possible (and it is done) with machine learning technology to impose the behavior of one onto the body of another.   Technology exists to simply use a picture of an individual (say Trump) and a video of behavior (say a monkey flinging poo) and cause an extremely convincing video of Trump flinging his own poo.

Some people don't understand the term "biochemistry" so do you really expect them to consider that the human body is merely a biochemical machine?

Yes.   Yes, I do.   Because this is so easy to look up and there are plenty of videos which present this in a very easy to understand format.

I have noticed that one individual who really should be in this seed is not.   It is the refusal to consider anything outside of one's comfort zone that keeps people ignorant.    It is their own damn fault IMO.

have noticed that one individual who really should be in this seed is not.

But if that person were here-- and even if they read all the comments-- do you really think that were change their views-- even one iota?

Not an iota.   And that stubborn arrogance to dismiss everything that does not fit within a preconceived view is the reason individuals like that ignore articles like this (much less actually read them ... much less actually consider what they read).

Stubborn arrogance with confirmation bias ⇨ stubborn ignorance

OMG.  Did you post this article because I posted this comment about the age of the Earth and the following one about the world being flat on the article about the 18,000 year old dog being found?

thenewstalkers

LOL.  If so, please note that I have 2 university Bachelor degrees and took lab sciences in Botany, Zoology, Chemistry and Physics in university.....

No, Buzz, my seed was not meant to be a reply to your comment in any way.  I assumed that your comment was a joke, because I know you're not ignorant.

BUT I didn't study Geography or History in university, so........

BUT I didn't study Geography or History in university, so.......

Anyone remember this "oldie"? (Sam Cooke "What a Wonderful World it Would Be")

It was sung by Louis Armstrong at the end of the movie "Sleepless in Seattle".

Two different songs by two different artists.

You're right . I must have been thinking of a different movie...I was thinking it was What A Wonderful World sung by Louis Armstrong:

azlyrics

Sam Cooke's "Wonderful World" is a totally different song.

In fact Jimmy Durante singing "Make Someone Happy" was the song at the end of the movie when Meg, Tom, and the kid playing Jonah got into the elevator to leave the Empire State Building observation deck.  Why did I think it was Armstrong singing What A Wonderful World?

Aha!  I just got it. I was thinking of "Meet Joe Black".

Here are the  lyrics in video (comment # 4. 2. 1) 

Thanks for posting it, Krishna - it was quite popular back when I was in law school and was played quite often then - I just didn't put the lyrics together with the title, because I couldn't open the YouTube you posted.

OMG.  Did you post this article because I posted this comment about the age of the Earth and the following one about the world being flat on the article about the 18,000 year old dog being found?

You comment reminds me of a story:

It was Friday in the clinic, and two of the psychiatrists were walking in the hall, leaving for the weekend. At the far end of the corridor one of their colleagues appears and speaks to them-- he says:

Have a good weekend!

After he leaves, one of the shrinks turns to the other and says:

I wonder what he meant by that?

(Remember-- sometimes a cigar is a "phallic symbol"-- but sometimes its just a damn good smoke!)

Thanks sandy, good article.

Seems that that ignorance thing is catchy. 

Of course ignorance is normal.  Ethan Siegel's whole freakin' point is that ignorance is normal.  If no one was ignorant then there wouldn't be a need for experts.  And as Siegel points out, experts are just as broadly ignorant as the rest of us; their expertise is limited to specifics.  No one can be an expert about everything, as Ethan Siegel points out.

So, the article is really a circular argument attempting to convince the public to have faith in experts who only know much about a little part of reality.  Experts are limited in their expertise and ignorant about the rest.

What is missing in these types of discussions is the importance of common sense and judgement.  People are required to make decisions in ignorance all the time.  We cannot rely upon experts to do our thinking for us; we have to live our own lives and make our own decisions daily.  We can't wait for a consensus of experts.

Expertise and knowledge has little value if it isn't applied.  Application of expertise requires common sense and judgement.  Without common sense, expertise is just eccentric ignorance.

And as Siegel points out, experts are just as broadly ignorant as the rest of us; their expertise is limited to specifics.  No one can be an expert about everything, as Ethan Siegel points out.

Here's an interesting definition of "expert" I heard some time ago:

An "expert" is someone who has stopped learning.

Obviously not true in all cases but it was designed to make a point . . . 

Of course ignorance is normal.  Ethan Siegel's whole freakin' point is that ignorance is normal. 

Perhaps. A little education can fix that. But willful ignorance is intentional and it's also shameful.

 Experts are limited in their expertise and ignorant about the rest.

They're the go to when it comes to information in a relevant field.

What is missing in these types of discussions is the importance of common sense and judgement.  People are required to make decisions in ignorance all the time.  We cannot rely upon experts to do our thinking for us; we have to live our own lives and make our own decisions daily.  We can't wait for a consensus of experts.

Decisions should be made using critical thinking and all available information so a rational judgement can be made.

Perhaps. A little education can fix that. But willful ignorance is intentional and it's also shameful.

What is often overlooked is that experts are specialists.  Specialists focus on developing mastery within a narrow aspect of reality.  Living within the confines of one's expertise can also be considered an act of willful ignorance.

It's important to note that specialists in nature are usually the first to go extinct.

They're the go to when it comes to information in a relevant field.

Which also indicates that specialists are sources of irrelevant information outside their specialty.  Someone who is a specialist in a segment of the scientific field provide irrelevant information for politics, as an example.

Decisions should be made using critical thinking and all available information so a rational judgement can be made.

Mastery of critical thinking (or common sense) and judgement are tools for general application.  Specialists may provide a source of specialized knowledge but specialists are too narrowly focused to allow for broad application.

Sandy one of the best seeds posted here in a long while, I wish it would make a difference around here but I very much doubt it will (sigh)

Thanks, Freefaller.  And unfortunately,  I think you're right. the people who need to read it and take it to heart are either absent or derisive.

Sandy one of the best seeds posted here in a long while, I wish it would make a difference around here but I very much doubt it will (sigh)

I have found that, generally speaking, the most ignorant people are the ones who are sure that "they know it all"...and are the most closed to new ideas. (And these are the sorts of people who comprise the majority of people who spend a lot of time on social media sites...)

(And similarly, the most knowledgeable folks are the ones who are aware of how much they don't know! But for the most part they don't spend as much time on social media-- rather they are out in the realworld, teaching, learning, and making a significant positive difference..)

Agreed

Funny you are here all the time.

as are you.

what is the humorous part again ?