[This was written Sept. 22, but I wrote it under Pages instead of Posts. Pages are the tabs up above (and below the banner. So I'm adding it in today.]
I've heard of Fargo, but farrago is a word that wasn't in my vocabulary until I saw this LA Times article on Sean M. Kirkpatrick, who is
"the first director of the Pentagon’s All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office, or AARO"
or the government's lead investigator of UFOs.
Here's where I encountered the word - I'm giving you more so you can see the context.
"From the start, Kirkpatrick says, he was determined to conduct a rigorously empirical inquiry: “We were looking for any data to substantiate any claims that were being made to Congress or in the social media arena.”
That applied not only to pilots’ reports of objects that seemed to have displayed unusual aeronautical behavior, but a farrago of reports in the press, online and among committed UFO believers about purportedly secret government programs to collect, examine and even attempt to reverse-engineer technology supposedly retrieved from crashed extraterrestrial UAPs."
My initial reaction was that the word was thrown in to sound erudite, as often is the case with such words. But this is a perfect use of the word as I understand it after reading the definition.
farrago /fə-rä′gō, -rā′-/
noun
An assortment or a medley; a conglomeration. A mass composed of various materials confusedly mixed; a medley; a mixture.Similar: medley/mixture
A collection containing a confused variety of miscellaneous things.
The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, 5th Edition
Also noteworthy in the article is the assault of the ignorant against science.
“In my case,” Kirkpatrick told me a few days ago, “I’ve been accused of lying to the American people.”
He further revealed to the Guardian that he had experienced efforts of UFO true believers to “threaten my wife and daughter, and try to break into our online accounts — far more than I ever had as the deputy director of intelligence [of U.S. Strategic Command]. I didn’t have China and Russia trying to get on me as much as these people are.”
The article compares the folks who refuse to believe the findings that there was no evidence of extra terrestrial visitors to the folks who refuse to believe in the COVID origin stories or that vaccines work.
That points to “a larger problem with public opinion about scientific inquiry — science by social media versus science by scientific method,” he says. “You’re seeing the degradation of critical thinking skills and rational thought when it comes to analyzing what’s out in the world.”
"When scientific data confound received beliefs, he says, 'people cry ‘conspiracy,’ or ‘the data is wrong,’ or ‘scientists are making it up.’... Well, some of these scientists have been around for 30 or 40 years. If you don’t believe they know what they’re doing, then what are you going to base your decisions on in the future? Just pure belief and speculation?'
Kirkpatrick is working on another article on the topic of misinformation. 'I see what I was doing on UAP and misinformation as a microcosm of many other issues that challenge the U.S. today. That is, the division across belief lines where evidence suggests a contrary opinion that conflicts with one’s own belief system or political system.'”
Hi Steve. Just a thought from across the pond...
ReplyDeleteWhen you started your enquiry last year asking HOW we got to this point (of finding more & more people believing the unproven in so many things around us) you more often than not explained the difference boiling down to university education levels.
I felt, and still do, that you do have the view of someone from the world of questions, of successfully negotiating the discipline of the academic reasoning & rewards. I also acknowledge that you (graciously) agreed that talent isn't limited to intellectual gifts, but also those of the 'multiple intelligences' view of human ability & talents.
So with all that, we plunged (as so many did then) into just HOW we could be at this political junction of PRO and CON re what we thought to be ‘dictator-in-waiting’ Donald Trump. We didn't succeed in pinning the tail-on-that-donkey, did we?
So today, I’m wiping my slate clean: I’m with many, if not most here, asking this question: Does Mr Trump plan to win regardless his methods to achieve it?
Given these past years of many quick checks and deep dives with so-many streams of thought & analysis, I have honed my own little thought for this presidential election in America, if anyone wishes to consider it. Mr Trump’s preparation is laid, his goal easy to know. He only awaits the day in which his blow will be struck.
Mr. Trump’s seizure of the presidency (at precious cost to a Republic) can be affirmed by his Supreme Court and a Congress with too-narrow mandate to intervene in a politically effective way. But most importantly, far too many Americans have ‘drunk the Kool-Aid’.
I am nearly 18 years from living in the USA now; I am also a person born to its promise & culture, to its history & dreams. I moved countries to know other histories, other ways of seeing law, culture & dreams. I can admit my shock to see so many Americans willing to surrender rule-of-law to a man of autocratic instincts, hoping his constitutional betrayal will deliver their aspirations. I have told European friends (here) that Americans have bedrock faith in their Constitution and its rule-of-law standards. It will win out.
Now I suspect I held a child’s faith: Too many Americans are faith-weary. So many flock to a ‘strong man’ promising his so-sweet nothing, “I’ll take back control for you.”
I am sorry to say that I am relieved to live where I do, where so very many here are asking, “What is happening to the USA?”
I knew my response would be too long to answer here, so I'll offer it in another blog post.
Delete