Thursday, 5 January 2017

Gosh James Annan

A new comment on the post "On being blocked on Twitter" is
http://scienceblogs.com/stoat/2017/01/04/on-being-blocked-on-twitter/
Author: Tom C 
Comment:

Gosh James Annan - thanks for taking a break from your taxpayer funded biking trips and offering your asinine take on Judith Curry.  Pity that her CV is so much more impressive than yours.

Sunday, 1 January 2017

If Latinos sit out the election instead of saying

A new comment on the post "Trump Calls The Majority Who Voted Against Him Enemies And Losers In New Year’s Message?" 
http://scienceblogs.com/stoat/2017/01/01/trump-calls-the-majority-who-voted-against-him-enemies-and-losers-in-new-years-message/

Author: See Noevo 

Comment:
"If Latinos sit out the election instead of saying, "Were going to PUNISH OUR ENEMIES and were gonna reward our friends who stand with us on issues that are important to us," if they don't see that kind of upsurge in voting in this election, then I think its going to be harder, and that's why I think its so important that people focus on voting on November 2."
- Barack Hussein Obama

[This one is over here, not over there, because it is sourceless and, I suspect, faked. I can find it at thenewamerican but I don't regard that as reliable. If it can be reliably sourced, I'll move it back.]

Sunday, 11 December 2016

Gather ye climate data while ye may

A comment on Tamino's Gather ye climate data while ye may which appears paranoid to me.

William Connolley 
Your comment is awaiting moderation. 
> has appointed a host of the worst imaginable climate deniers
Really? How large, numerically, is this “host”?
> NASA and from NOAA. I fully expect that they will either be halted altogether, or worse yet, will be deliberately altered to hide the truth
That sounds like paranoia. In your last clause you seem to be veering off into the land of the Watties.

Friday, 9 December 2016

The gravy train is about to hit the buffers I'm afraid

A new comment on the post "Scott Adams is a tosser"
http://scienceblogs.com/stoat/2016/12/07/scott-adams-is-a-tosser/

Author: Jim


Comment:
@Fergus Brown I hear he speaks well of you too.  I don't think Trump needs much persuasion.  The gravy train is about to hit the buffers I'm afraid.

P.S. I'm not getting any of the requested notifications of follow up comments, etc.  Maybe you'd care to have a look at this?

Feel free to sound off in your echo chamber for as long as it lasts

A new comment on the post "Scott Adams is a tosser"
http://scienceblogs.com/stoat/2016/12/07/scott-adams-is-a-tosser/

Author: Jim


Comment:
Feel free to sound off in your echo chamber for as long as it lasts.  As of 20th January 2017, the countdown to complete and utter irrelevance begins.

Friday, 26 August 2016

Great modern theories? These are just Jew science fraud

A new comment on the post "Feyerabend?" http://scienceblogs.com/stoat/2016/08/22/feyerabend/

Author: Graeme Bird
Comment:

"It appears especially stupid when laid against the great modern theories like relativity or QM."

Great modern theories? These are just Jew science fraud. They are not representative of the scientific method at all.

Saturday, 9 July 2016

ATTP: The Scientific Method

A comment I put at https://andthentheresphysics.wordpress.com/2016/07/09/the-scientific-method:

The article's two examples are flawed.

> When Socrates asked “What is justice?” there was never any doubt that his listeners knew what the word “justice” meant.

This isn't true; different participants to the dialogue have different views. One proposes "might is right" and "Socrates" (really Plato) has no coherent answer to that viewpoint. Interestingly, Justice is indeed very hard to define, unless you accept Hobbes's version, which is to define it as "all that is not unjust", and define *that* as breaking covenants, which I think is an excellent approach (http://scienceblogs.com/stoat/2012/01/30/justice-and-injustice/). This inversion is reminiscent of Popper's.

Meanwhile, the bit about Kepler is over-simplified at best, since motion around the orbit not just its shape was very important.

As to your question, do scientists need to study philosophy of science, I think I'd go for a Kuhn-like paradigm-type answer: 95%+ of scientists are doing factory-science and don't need that kind of stuff; its the 5% who are in some sense thought-leading and truely innovating who need it; but then again, they've already got it, or they wouldn't be there.

[See-also my: Science]