Follow by Email

Sunday, 28 December 2014

Lest we Forget Anne Glover…

As 2014 draws to an end and Anne Glover disappears back to her monastery, there is a danger that what she said and her actions will be forgotten. So here I record just a few of her strange ideas and remarks with the intention that they will haunt all scientists who, now and in the future, through their Will to Power, seek to establish Scientific Government. Her comments also serve to remind the sane that science and technology are too important to allow scientists and technologists – with their scientific and technological determinism, their reductionist and fragmented minds, and their Enlightenment notions of progress – power to influence the course of development of science and technology, and that if they are so allowed, this will inevitably lead to yet more horrific episodes in the human story, for these have and always will be a consequence of the Will to Power. And so …

From the European Academy of Sciences and Arts Spinoza lecture delivered on 19 November 2013 (

1. “We are all entitled to our own opinion but not to our own facts.”

Spoken like a true devote of any Abrahamic religion – no room here for heretics with different facts.

2. “In an ideal world in which policies were based on peer reviewed scientific data, policies would evolve but would not change from one government to the other.”

Spoken like a true totalitarian – in a totalitarian system of government policies evolve but do change significantly with time for they are the prisoners of dogma, and thus comes forth that which is all too familiar …

From the FT article: Finding an element of trust

“We trust industry where it suits us: in the toothpaste we use, the pizza we buy or the car we drive.”

Spoken like someone who demonstrates little understanding of the grim facts of business – we do not trust industry, but look to government to impose regulations on industry because we know that they cannot be trusted. The evidence is clear, and can be found in history books and news and current affairs programmes. There are a countless number of examples, stretching back in time from the present to the early days of industrial capitalism, both high-tech and no-tech, where lack of trust has been fully justified.

Here is just one small and topical example: on January 1st 2015 VAT regulations in the European Union are changing. In inter-country business-to-consumer transactions, VAT has so far been payable at the rate in force in the country where the business supplying the product or service is based. It will in future be incurred at the rate in force where the EU end-consumer resides. Why is this change being made? The answer is that many major players in the online retail industry deliberately establish their head office in any country offering the best possible VAT rates. And the reason they do this is that directors of these companies have a fiduciary responsibility to do so. And at times this drives companies into unethical and sometimes dishonest business practices, and you will be surprised how easy it is to create such a culture within a company. And I note here, that this is also the case in university science, engineering and technology research departments, where unethical practices and behaviour are the norm. So please – no more nonsense about trusting industry when it suits us. Where money and profits are involved, we need law and its enforcement, for trust does not work. And the same comment applies to scientists, engineers and technologists working in research departments in both the public and the private sector – the Will to Power! We should not trust scientists, engineers or technologists or the organisations that employ them. We need law to make these people and organisations accountable for their actions, and we need investigative journalists and artists willing to expose their collective delusions and their hidden agendas.

In the demise of Anne Glover as a Chief Scientific Advisor, we may have won a small victory, but the war against the madness of science and scientists has not been won. And the comment made by the President of the Royal Society about Anne Glover’s demise serves as a further warning: “Scientific advice must be central to EU policy-making , otherwise you run the risk of having important decisions being unduly influenced by those with mixed motives.” And this, it would seem, was said as though scientists do not give advice with mixed motives! More nonsense from the deluded scientific mind!

My message to all scientists, engineers and technologist who seek power and want a technocratic form of Scientific Government – Soviet style government – is to form a political party and stand for election and then we will be able to see just how extreme and nutty you actually are.

To conclude my 2014 blogs, I look to the future, with the observation that the quest to find an entirely new approach to considering science, engineering and technology in policymaking remains and can be formulated thus: how to achieve the benefits without scientists, engineers and technologists destroying humanity. We have already drifted far too far along the path to destruction and it is now time to begin to walk a different path. And until scientists, engineers and technologist fundamentally change and reject the foundations upon which their practise is based, they should expect to experience an increasing storm of rejection. And this is something for all you deficit model and all we need is better communication thinkers to take note of.

My promise to you for 2015 and beyond is to begin to raise such a storm.


  1. This article is efficient. Thank you for sharing it with us. I am visiting this blog on a daily basis and I am finding so much helpful article each time. Keep working on this and thank you once again. xnxx

  2. Thank you for your encouraging comment. There is much to write about - in blogs, tweets and books! Regards, Paul T Kidd