I’m going to propose that we need a new scientific unit. They’re useful things in science. It’s no good just saying ‘distance’, for example, we need to know whether we’re talking inches or kilometres. I walked 30 to get to the local shop is a pretty meaningless statement unless we know what the ‘30’ is measured in - and with this example we might even be talking about time instead of distance!
We desperately need a measure of absurdity. It’s everywhere - and we need to be able to figure out how much of the stuff we have in any given instance.
This ‘article’ was purported to be from the BBC.
It is, of course, a fake, but it was a fake designed to highlight the absurdity of all of the legitimate articles that were coming out ascribing an increased risk of heart attacks to anything and everything not beginning with the letter V.
In honour of the seminal contributions of Imperial’s Neil Ferguson (to science - not to his mistress) the basic unit of absurdity will be known as the Ferg.
Neil the Unreal did at least model some stuff and there was some sense in those models. They gave the wrong answers, their predictions were absurd, but we’re not talking bats in the belfry, pink iguanas on the ceiling levels of bonkers here. Accordingly, we’re going to ascribe his ‘pandemic’ modelling a level of 1 Ferg of absurdity.
In the past, experts would aim for their statements, on average, to typically be at the level of a micro-Ferg at worst. Even the greatest can say something stupid at times. The new all-improved Expert™ typically aims for an average level of a mega-Ferg.
Like the planet, many scientists are only just beginning to warm up to this new way of doing things. They’re cautiously improving their Ferg rating.
Following on Neil’s heels we had the modelling, also from Imperial I believe, that claimed to show the (cough) vaccines had saved up to 20 million lives worldwide from covid in the 2nd year of the (cough) pandemic. Although more research is needed to figure out how we actually measure a Ferg, I would judge this ‘result’ to be at the level of a few tens of Fergs.
Then there was this cracker (that was definitely crackers) which earned the authors a significant boost up the Ferg league table.
And we shouldn’t forget the Bangladesh mask ‘study’ which argued for the efficacy of masks, but ended up showing that the colour of the mask you chose was important. Fashion statements matter; not only do they indicate how cool you are, they can also save you from covid!
We can summarize the work of many of today’s scientists by referring to the work of Digbert Burbleson of Delirial College during covid. Here’s his modelling of how masks work
His work has clearly been influenced by the climate modellers.
Climate scientists, themselves, are reported to be unhappy. Their work, typically coming in at the scale of a few Fergs (semi-sensible modelling which gives rise to predictions that completely fail to match observation), cannot match the sheer Fergosity of scientists working in the biological arena.
Here one can claim that sex in humans exists on a spectrum; a statement that begins to reach the mega-Ferg level. Knowing that most of us can’t tell the difference between a haploid and a haemorrhoid, they can effortlessly move up the Ferg table and reach Ferg levels climate scientists can only dream about.
But it’s small potatoes compared to those in the social ‘sciences’. In these ‘disciplines’ one can typically arrive at conclusions and theories that have to be measured in giga-Fergs. You can even piggy-back off the climate scientists and show them how they can improve their Ferg rating by including some wokery
This technique for improving one’s Ferg rating has been picked up by some climate scientists who are now openly talking about “climate justice”. Not content with merely being wrong - they’re aiming for levels of absurdity unimagined by climate scientists of only a couple of decades ago.
We should feel a bit sorry for climate scientists, though. Even with these new woke techniques they’re not going to be able to improve their Ferg rating too much. At some point people might notice they’re not being burned to a crisp when they walk outside to water their lush, green, and racist garden.
No such constraints limit the social scientists, however. They’re free to make any and all kinds of absurd statements and construct all manner of ridiculous theories that easily surpass the Ferg levels of the climate scientists, even if they add a drop or two of climate justice to their models.
Indeed, if you’ve been infected by the PomoVirus (or its variant, the CriticalTheory Virus), you do not even recognise a Ferg as a valid concept, because you do not recognise absurdity as a valid concept. If ‘reality’ is socially constructed in some sense then any ‘lived experience’, no matter how absurd, is taken to be a superior ‘way of knowing’. You can literally believe any old shite with no problem whatsoever, because it does not have to match up to observation at all. The whole concept of some idea actually having a passing acquaintance with ‘reality’ is just a tool of oppression.
This is how you can get someone making statements like “cops are hunting down black people on the street and killing them” without dissolving in a fit of giggles.
If you’ve survived the initial infection with either of these viruses, the sequelae are devastating; with an entirely straight face, and in all seriousness, you can declare that lawns are “an education in colonialism” or that the countryside is racist.
We don’t, yet, know how to calibrate a Ferg meter to cope with these stratospheric levels of absurdity.
It’s an exciting time, with many new discoveries about Fergs just waiting to be made. I’m currently recruiting a research team to work on this important new area. Applications are invited from anyone who is not white, straight, male or female, in order to maximise the quality of the research, because diversity leads to the best results, because it just does.
I’m not open to debate any of these ideas - I’m right and I know it.
Surely Sunny Sigh's social media account must be a parody site otherwise the title of 'professor' has been degraded to what the financial markets rating agencies call junk status
Reading this put a real Cheshire-cat grin on my face!
Ferg is a good choice I feel. It sounds as if it means something, but it really doesn't. Very fitting.
I'd suggest viewing the Ferg from outside as a finite unit; there is either Ferg or there is not. No degrees or fractions or scaling, only Ferg or no Ferg. From within, the Ferg is instead infinite and limitless.
So you never know from outside how much of a Ferg a specific Ferg is. "All Fergs are Fergs, but some Fergs are more Ferg than others." sort of.
(Looking forward to seeing what the search-engine algorythms is going to make of 'ferg'.)
As an aside, for the humanities I'd suggest the unit SMURF: Social Media Universal Recursive Ferg.