Posted by: graemebird | June 7, 2012

Revision: Paradigms In Parallel/The Scientific Method

Adapted from the comments section of this blog:

Its not my version of science. Its your characterisation-OF ….  my version of science. But it would be fair to say that I would have a different view of testing an hypothesis, then the idiots running things at the moment. Which is why I’m by far the best qualified person to be minister of science.

Supposing you have a view of light-bulbs. And this view says that there is a parallel universe, with pink elephants in that parallel universe, who can see us, and we cannot see them. And by the way they are far from fucking pleased with your behaviour, and the behaviour of people like you.

But these pink elephants aren’t just given over to displeasure; Nay,  they are beings responsible for the illumination of the human race, both metaphorically and literally. Every time I switch on the light-bulb these pink elephants see this, with great haste they say “let their be light” and the light comes on.

Now go to your light-switch and test this hypothesis. You will find that you switch on the light, and amazingly the pink elephant hypothesis is confirmed. All over the world, millions of times per second, the pink elephant hypothesis is being confirmed, over and over and over again. Now we come to a bullshit phrase the anti-scientists have. THE WEIGHT OF EVIDENCE.  To be fair the phrase has its uses. But it has its misuses as well.

How can you doubt the pink elephant story, when the weight of evidence is so strong?  Look! Try again. Go to your light-switch, and prove the hypothesis anew?

You see the problem here? Its impossible to test any hypothesis in isolation. And should you have a NULL HYPOTHESIS this is simply an excuse for not defining a serious competitor. So science doesn’t really begin until you have a third option.

Here we have the problem with the alleged confirmation of special relativity. Total bullshit theory.  More stupid then the pink elephant paradigm, since at least the elephant story isn’t (so far) self-contradictory. But if the believers want to run tests all over the world, the confirmation is going to pile up, and no matter how many times this utter bullshit (childish bullshit) is proven wrong, they will start talking about the WEIGHT OF EVIDENCE. They will also start talking about peer review, they will start running down those who have proven the theory wrong, they will start sharing lame excuses and locking them in like religious pronouncements, they will start the name-calling (crank, truther, birther, pidder, conspiracy theorist, anti-semite, hater of jew-science … and so forth).

“I”ve turned the light-switch on myself” they will in effect say, with great anger, just before they block you from their blog for all time.

In logic its simply impossible to prove anything without looking at all the main options. Even the two options of the null and the tested hypothesis, are really only testing one option, and finding what you want to know. Try as you might you cannot logically describe a working, productive, cost-effective or workable testing process, that doesn’t look at three or more possibilities.

Advertisements

Responses

  1. Sometimes you get a bit down and you try to talk to all the girls on facebook. But when you get a little bit more down the only thing to do is to dial up Roy Innis. Happy Birthday Roy Innis. A true leader in a world of wimps, sellouts, parasites, hustlers, and thieves ……

    • Dear Graeme, if you want to cheer yourself up go to the Cat and wreak some havoc. That’ll put a spring in your step. Hugs and kisses.

      • Mr B

        Apparently the Hebrew-in-Charge (Davidowitz) will be away for the long weekend and Catallaxy will be unguarded.

      • Don’t be rude Tillman.

  2. […] uncensored on “Revision: Paradigms In Parallel/The Scientific Method“ @ A Better World: Graeme Bird For High Office. Share this:TwitterFacebookLike this:LikeBe […]

  3. Consider if your personal epistemology has excellence, like the personal epistemology of Roy Innis, you can wade through the bullshit of the modern world and consistently come up with the right answers.

    Here is Roy Innis. Somehow understanding the crucial nature of energy in modern life, and in relieving the plight of the underclass, as if he had been studying the relationship between energy, capital accumulation, and the economy in general, as a professional, all his life. Reagan had this talent as well. Reagan would work his way through the issues in his own way, and for the most part, find himself far in advance of the alleged experts:

  4. Here is how Roy Innis deals with a false prophet. A Hustler, who uses the authentic grudges of his people, to emotionally manipulate his people, to his personal gain but to the loss of his people. Roy Innis has a short fuse for such hustlers, and cultural cranks. Its like a case of “the thin man” dealing with the fat boy. “You just HAD to have that last piece of cake” says the thin man. Roy was strong physically, morally, mentally, and from the view of inherent epistemology he had few equals, since he had the capacity to cut through all the bullshit.

  5. Hey Kids? Do you like that rock and roll?

  6. 23 Things They Don’t Tell You About Capitalism. Or more accurately “capitalism.” Excellent talk. All points mentioned here valid. A good antidote to the incredible ignorance of the Australian Keynesian-Neoclassical consensus.

  7. What is the stupid wop complaining about? We have yet ANOTHER bank bailout in Spain. That is to say more stealing by the financial sector. More abuse of the public by these welfare queens like Cambria. But lets have Cambria speak for himself. Bear in mind, this silly cunt is in favour of this bailout AND ALL OTHERS. So you figure out what he’s complaining about:

    “Fuck, Krugman is fucking dishonest. He’s just not ordinarily dishonest. He’s psychotically dishonest.

    look at the headline of his latest blog piece which either he or his wife wrote as you simply can’t tell.

    Another Bank Bailout

    It’s true of course. There was a spanish bailout.

    Oh, wow — another bank bailout, this time in Spain. Who could have predicted that?

    What of course the fucker doesn’t tell you is the banks getting bailed were all government or provincially owned.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/11/opinion/krugman-another-bank-bailout.html?smid=tw-NytimesKrugman&seid=auto

    Now put aside the reality that we have to assume that Cambria is lying. Its unlikely that he’s telling the truth that they are all government-owned banks. But if it is, its simply the banking parasites bailing out their counter-party risk at the expense of the public. An exercise in direct stealing.

  8. “Which is why I’m by far the best qualified person to be minister of science”
    Ahahahahahahaha.
    Oh wait, you’re serious?
    Well, carry on then
    *smirks*

  9. I am serious. On this blog we have excellent clarifications in practical epistemology. Practical epistemology right down to the point of what needs to be done in terms of re-organizing the public service, especially the CSIRO, and rolling up ones sleeves and getting down to business.

    You won’t find anyone who has this subject as well thought through as I do. No-one.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Categories

%d bloggers like this: