“Last Sons” by GeekRemixed
Remixed and Re-edited by Fatboy Roberts, 2013, as a Geek: Remixed One-Shot. Contains samples from “The Planet Krypton” and “Prelude and Main Title (Alternate)” from “Superman: The Movie” by John Williams, and “Man of Steel” by Hans Zimmer.
“Judgment Day” by Thunderclaps
Shorter Hans-Hermann Hoppe: “If you feign ignorance of basic economic concepts you can win debates by appealing to the stupidity of the audience.”
This is (dated) via Noah Smith who explains the the economic problems with Hoppe’s tactic but belief in the prowess of ignorance to win an argument is not exclusive to Hoppe and certainly not to economics. Normally though this type of ignorance isn’t advocated by a professor emeritus rather it’s shouted by heckling creationists saying “If evolution is true how come you can’t put a gorilla in a cage and turn it into a person?” (Which, by the way, I was once asked by a relative).
As Smith points out if all knowledge must conform to common sense you could also say:
“Explain how you can possibly float just by heating up the air in a balloon. If this were the case, couldn’t our tea kettles levitate?”
“Explain how you can possibly stay healthy by washing your hands with water. If this were the case, wouldn’t people who drank out of rivers never get sick?This is a similar to the often deliberate misunderstanding which leads some people to conclude we must accept arguments with intuitive premises. It’s as if some people think “If a child wouldn’t believe it, then reality can’t be that way.” is a valid argument.
[via]
Even though this was meant to be funny, it’s a good example of why many statistics are bullshit.
Even if the two were slightly related, usually the author of the statistics presents no justification for the comparison, nor do they mention the uncontrollable variables that cause an unfair comparison.
So the next time you see a statistical graph comparing, say, one country to another, just remember this little post.
Every day hundreds of innocent statistics, like this little correlation, get abused due to carelessness or intent to deceive.
Don’t be silent, speak out against statistics abuse.
People who say everything happens for a reason haven’t accidentally dropped their entire dinner on the floor
I have… and I still say it. To suggest that accidents are immune from reason is ridiculous.
Whenever I hear someone say that phrase, the word “reason” typically implies that what happened was supposed to or was willed to happen (by some deity or fate), not that it happened due to a mere predetermined chain of cause and effect states.
Well I don’t know what definition of “reason” you’re using, but if reason to you, implies fate, or some other mystical thing, it’s actually the exact opposite. Why it looks that way to you I don’t think I could possibly wrap my head around.
Reason derives from logic. Cause and effect is a form of logic. In the way I used the word above, it implies not only an obvious cause and effect, but also that the accident is not without an explanation or “reason”. In other words, I’m refuting the idea that things just happen for no reason.
Yes, I agree with you; my last post was only a description of what I’ve observed, not what I personally believe. I had stayed away from the phrase because people tend to use the strange definition of reason I outlined above, but now I see that the phrase can be used in a sensible way.
People who say everything happens for a reason haven’t accidentally dropped their entire dinner on the floor
I have… and I still say it. To suggest that accidents are immune from reason is ridiculous.
Whenever I hear someone say that phrase, the word “reason” typically implies that what happened was supposed to or was willed to happen (by some deity or fate), not that it happened due to a mere predetermined chain of cause and effect states.
Artist: Edward Shearmur
Title: Grand Central
Album: K-Pax: Original Motion Picture Score
An important reminder that, simply because you come up with one theory or even manage to falsify one theory, you aren’t necessarily right.
Huh, so it’s like a failure to recognize a confound that’s affecting your variable of interest. You’ve assumed that the same rule produced the outcome every time, when the rule itself has been changing. I will have to remember this one.
On a related note, after finding evidence that your theory explains the phenomenon of interest, also make sure that theories which oppose yours don’t explain it:
This study suggests that the soothing power of words has more to do with tonal cues to speech than semantic content. The researchers were able to tease this apart by having young children undergo a stressor and then had them in one of four conditions:
They then measured the amount of salival cortisol (associated with stress) and urinary oxytocin (associated with forming and maintaining positive relationships) and compared the groups. In the end, they found that the no contact and instant messaging groups had significantly high cortisol levels, and significantly low levels of oxytocin (both relative to the partial and full contact groups).
If one thinks of humans as evolved creatures, these findings make sense. Stressors can come in a variety of different forms (e.g, failure to attain resources, failure to find/retain a mate, salient disease/physical safety threat, etc.) and having a way to relieve that stress would be adaptive. I wouldn’t say that speech came about for this purpose, but, given that speech is incredibly useful for other things (like allowing us to benefit from others’ knowledge) and so became standard issue for humans, it is plausible that further complexity could build off of that foundation. The finding that semantic content does not matter much is surprising, but makes sense given that young children also have stressors and it takes them some time to learn a language.
I would like to see if similar results would be found in adults, considering that some stressors can be explained away with semantic content.
![dialectic:
tastefullyoffensive:
[via]
Even though this was meant to be funny, it’s a good example of why many statistics are bullshit.
Even if the two were slightly related, usually the author of the statistics presents no justification for the comparison, nor do they mention the uncontrollable variables that cause an unfair comparison.
So the next time you see a statistical graph comparing, say, one country to another, just remember this little post.
Every day hundreds of innocent statistics, like this little correlation, get abused due to carelessness or intent to deceive.
Don’t be silent, speak out against statistics abuse.](http://24.media.tumblr.com/b8a58d94078efc9464018f320d01fbec/tumblr_mldnknO7Si1qewacoo1_500.jpg)