Peter Thiel

And then the only field that was actually going to progress a lot was computer science. And again, you know, it's been very powerful, but that was not the felt sense in the 1980s. In the 1980s, computer science was this ridiculous inferior subject. You know, I always the linguistic cut is always when people use the word science, I'm in favor of science. I'm not in favor of science in quotes.

And when it's always a tell that it's not real science. And so when we call it climate science or political science or social science, you know, you're just sort of making it up. and you have an inferiority complex to real science or something like physics or chemistry. And computer science was in the same category as social science or political science.

And when it's always a tell that it's not real science. And so when we call it climate science or political science or social science, you know, you're just sort of making it up. and you have an inferiority complex to real science or something like physics or chemistry. And computer science was in the same category as social science or political science.

And when it's always a tell that it's not real science. And so when we call it climate science or political science or social science, you know, you're just sort of making it up. and you have an inferiority complex to real science or something like physics or chemistry. And computer science was in the same category as social science or political science.

It was a fake field for people who found electrical engineering or math way too hard and sort of dropped out of the real science and real engineering fields.

It was a fake field for people who found electrical engineering or math way too hard and sort of dropped out of the real science and real engineering fields.

It was a fake field for people who found electrical engineering or math way too hard and sort of dropped out of the real science and real engineering fields.

It's – well, it's – there's several different things one could say. It's possible climate change is happening. It's possible we don't have great accounts of why that's going on. So I'm not questioning any of those things. But how scientific it is, I don't think – I don't think it's a place where we have really vigorous debates. Maybe the climate is increasing because of carbon dioxide emissions.

It's – well, it's – there's several different things one could say. It's possible climate change is happening. It's possible we don't have great accounts of why that's going on. So I'm not questioning any of those things. But how scientific it is, I don't think – I don't think it's a place where we have really vigorous debates. Maybe the climate is increasing because of carbon dioxide emissions.

It's – well, it's – there's several different things one could say. It's possible climate change is happening. It's possible we don't have great accounts of why that's going on. So I'm not questioning any of those things. But how scientific it is, I don't think – I don't think it's a place where we have really vigorous debates. Maybe the climate is increasing because of carbon dioxide emissions.

Temperatures are going up. Maybe it's methane. Maybe it's people are eating too much steak. It's the cows flatulating. And you have to measure how much is methane a greenhouse gas versus carbon dioxide. I don't think they're... I don't think they're rigorously doing that stuff scientifically.

Temperatures are going up. Maybe it's methane. Maybe it's people are eating too much steak. It's the cows flatulating. And you have to measure how much is methane a greenhouse gas versus carbon dioxide. I don't think they're... I don't think they're rigorously doing that stuff scientifically.

Temperatures are going up. Maybe it's methane. Maybe it's people are eating too much steak. It's the cows flatulating. And you have to measure how much is methane a greenhouse gas versus carbon dioxide. I don't think they're... I don't think they're rigorously doing that stuff scientifically.

I think the fact that it's called climate science tells you that it's more dogmatic than anything that's truly science should be. Dogma doesn't mean it's wrong.

I think the fact that it's called climate science tells you that it's more dogmatic than anything that's truly science should be. Dogma doesn't mean it's wrong.

I think the fact that it's called climate science tells you that it's more dogmatic than anything that's truly science should be. Dogma doesn't mean it's wrong.

Yeah, but no one calls it nuclear science. They call it nuclear engineering. Interesting.

Yeah, but no one calls it nuclear science. They call it nuclear engineering. Interesting.

Yeah, but no one calls it nuclear science. They call it nuclear engineering. Interesting.

The only thing is, I'm just making a narrow linguistic point.