A piece discussing our work in @iflscience.com

Whether this means this movement will fail, I dont know. It's certainly bucking a trend at least. Or I'm wrong, which is also possible

If you unavoidably are, you'd usually have to practice conspicuous asceticism and renounce your privileged background. I dont see Thiel, Musk & the others doing that. Some half hearted & unconvincing attempts to claim humble origins, but I don't think that's enough.

The interesting thing is that generally messianic and prophetic leaders tend come from disadvantaged backgrounds - if you argue the world is wicked and in need of destruction/rebirth, it's not a good look to be part of the elite

Wait what, we didn't know that yet??

Yes, I'm German

What we have seen with the routine introduction of humour into politics - an activity with a similar seriousness at its core - is that it has not always been 100% positive. I prefer serious politics to lol memes about deporting children

However, one thing to keep in mind is that science humour is effective because science is generally seen as dull and serious, thus creating the comedic incongruity. So too much of it may lessen the effect.

Bruno Pinto and I found no significant educational benefits of humour in science communication in our study last year. journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10..... This does not mean it's not worth doing if people enjoy it. Or maybe the jokes weren't funny enough. More research needed, as per usual

Ok, so if I understand correctly, yea, if he attacks Greenland, Greenland needs to help by invading itself. I need another beer

It just occurred to me that I should have used my first ever bluesky post to advertise the book rather than just subtly hint at it. www.taylorfrancis.com/books/mono/1...

I have taught a module on the sociology of the apocalypse for several years now, even wrote a book on it. I always found the apocalypticists scarier than the apocalypse itself. This is an... interesting development

Looks great, congrats!