|
About This Author
Come closer.
|
Carrion Luggage
Carrion Luggage
 
Native to the Americas, the turkey vulture (Cathartes aura) travels widely in search of sustenance. While usually foraging alone, it relies on other individuals of its species for companionship and mutual protection. Sometimes misunderstood, sometimes feared, sometimes shunned, it nevertheless performs an important role in the ecosystem.
This scavenger bird is a marvel of efficiency. Rather than expend energy flapping its wings, it instead locates uplifting columns of air, and spirals within them in order to glide to greater heights. This behavior has been mistaken for opportunism, interpreted as if it is circling doomed terrestrial animals destined to be its next meal. In truth, the vulture takes advantage of these thermals to gain the altitude needed glide longer distances, flying not out of necessity, but for the joy of it.
It also avoids the exertion necessary to capture live prey, preferring instead to feast upon that which is already dead. In this behavior, it resembles many humans.
It is not what most of us would consider to be a pretty bird. While its habits are often off-putting, or even disgusting, to members of more fastidious species, the turkey vulture helps to keep the environment from being clogged with detritus. Hence its Latin binomial, which translates to English as "golden purifier."
I rarely know where the winds will take me next, or what I might find there. The journey is the destination.
January 7, 2026 at 9:00am January 7, 2026 at 9:00am
| |
A bit of what I'd consider irony from The Conversation:
Ancient scientists can be easy to dismiss.
The headline says the article is about misinformation. And then it goes calling people from ancient Greece and Rome "scientists," when that concept wasn't really a thing until something like the 1500s, and the term itself wasn't coined until the 1800s (because some chick was doing science, and up until that point, people who did that were called "men of science").
It's a little bit like calling an abacus a calculator: kind of true, but misleading.
Oh, and who the hell dismisses ancient, um, natural philosphers? People quote Aristotle to this day, and Archimedes is practically a god to engineers.
Greek philosopher Thales of Miletus, often described as the West’s first scientist, believed the whole Earth was suspended on water.
If you go by "belief," that's not science.
Roman encyclopaedist Pliny the Elder recommended entrails, chicken brains, and mice cut in two as topical remedies for snakebite.
And? Newton believed in astrology and alchemy. That doesn't make his actual scientific (and mathematical) insights any less profound. The whole point of science is to cut through the bullshit. I feel like this article is verging on anti-science propaganda.
The lone ancient Greek thinker who believed Earth orbits the Sun – Aristarchus of Samos – was universally dismissed by his contemporaries.
I want to try to be crystal-clear here, so bear with me:
The most commonly quoted example of "people who were mocked and/or dismissed by their peers but were later shown to be right" is probably Galileo. But there's a real danger here of falling into a trap: there's a common trope both in fiction and in real life to invoke the name of Galileo when someone has an idea that's being mocked and/or dismissed, the implication being that "Well, Galileo turned out to be right, and one day, my theory about birds flying due to phlogiston radiation will turn out to be right, and then they'll see. Everyone will see!"
In other words, yes, sometimes you'll turn out to be right. Sometimes that's by accident. Sometimes it's because you did actual observation, testing, etc. If you're wrong, that's quickly forgotten. It's like when a fortune-teller tells you "you will find love soon," and then you find love, and you're like "Wow! She was right!" ignoring the fact that love is pretty thick on the ground and you were going to find it anyway if you bothered to look.
However, thinkers 2,500 years ago already faced many problems that are today amplified by social media and artificial intelligence (AI), such as how to tell truth from fiction.
That's probably because social media and AI are both products of humanity, merely scaled up in speed and volume.
But hey, I could be wrong.
Here are five lessons from ancient Greek and Roman science that ring surprisingly true in the face of misinformation in the modern world.
While I still cringe at "science" and "scientist" being applied to that time period, perhaps the overall thrust of the article is useful. Let's see:
1. Start with observations
Almost every ancient scientific text offers advice about observing or collecting data before making a decision.
Okay. I'm with you so far. I just said observation is important. It's not enough, of course, but it's a first step. It seems almost tautological, though: how can you draw any conclusions, right or wrong, if you don't make some sort of observation first?
2. Think critically
Ancient scientists insisted their readers think critically, encouraging us to analyse the claims made by other people.
I can't dismiss the importance of thinking critically. Two problems, though: 1) It's often easier said than done, and, like any skill, requires training and practice; and 2) It is absolutely possible to build an entire skyscraper of thought that rests on a swampy foundation.
Ancient scientists encourage us to think critically about information we read or hear, because even well-meaning sources are not always accurate.
For instance, calling natural philosophers "scientists."
Though, to be fair, I'm willing to accept that this is a categorization issue, not a misinformation one. Like calling the Blue Ridge Mountains "mountains," which people from the Rockies always have a good laugh about.
3. Acknowledge what you don’t know
Another skill ancient scientists encourage is acknowledging our limits. Even Greek and Roman scientists who claimed to be experts in their field frequently admitted they didn’t have all the answers.
Fair enough. I've said for a long time that this is important. There exist, however, numerous people who believe, against all evidence, that it's better to be confident and wrong than skeptical and right.
4. Science is part of culture
Ancient thinkers understood that science was part of culture rather than separate from it, and that an individual’s beliefs and values will have a significant impact on the information they promote as “factual” or “truthful”.
I'd be really, really careful with this one. It can lead to beliefs like "science claims to have falsified this aspect of traditional medicine, but that's because it's from a different culture," and the ultimate dismissal of science as "western imperialism" or whatever.
5. Science is for everyone
Ancient scientists understood the importance of deferring to specialists and listening to expert advice. However, they were also keen for their readers to understand where scientists acquire knowledge and how scientific facts can be verified.
I agree with the "science is for everyone" bit. Ever diagnosed a problem with your computer, or lawnmower, or whatever? Then you've basically done science. Observe, hypothesize, test, etc.
And it's important to "understand where scientists acquire knowledge and how scientific facts can be verified." The problem is, there's way more science out there than any one person can possibly verify, and it's truly impossible to verify everything yourself. You can verify some things, and share that knowledge, but the people you share it with should think critically, too, thus compounding the problem.
In summary, I remain skeptical. |
© Copyright 2026 Robert Waltz (UN: cathartes02 at Writing.Com). All rights reserved.
Robert Waltz has granted InkSpot.Com, its affiliates and its syndicates non-exclusive rights to display this work.
|
Comment • View 4 comments 
