Social science needs science not just GroupThink. Grand ideas need a stay, for scientific experimental evidence. You know!, you say, where’s the correct data? What you spend your time on–is it done scientifically, by correct procedure? We want to know, “we’re frayed, ’bout to hit an iceberg–someone thinks if all the ice melts: no more calamities.” Could you critique the novel, “Titan,” such that it isn’t apologist but a paradigm shift–turn away from the rocky shore–global calamities from not scientifically pursuing viable divergent solutions? There is those that “try,” others “done deal,” work ahead, check economic incentives and gradient on disincentives from State Value indices, that the work isn’t Keynesian waste, but instead assessed on the Value Index, computed with bottom figure returns that you can be happy about while doing as the World Conference on Earth pulls together on and we seek big profit while obscene profits get capped at “huge” profit” to satisfy the 1℅ citizen, “big” profit by the 5℅, while practicing accounting scientific law: “money earned or ‘lapped up’, is the revenue that pays for scientific proceedings” supplemented income tax that bolsters and infuses the reformed liberal economics with work that genuinely, authentically valued–therefore genuinely earned–therefore keeping the Government Bond Ratings up, instead of down. Keeping the government solvent.