tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post2042444681431376963..comments2024-03-29T00:39:31.629-07:00Comments on CONTRARY BRIN: We are in it, all right. But “figuratively”? … or “literally”?David Brinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14465315130418506525noreply@blogger.comBlogger226125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-23656364679359794782016-11-16T14:51:42.317-08:002016-11-16T14:51:42.317-08:00onward
onwardonward<br /><br />onwardDavid Brinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14465315130418506525noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-17946410739227207152016-11-16T14:51:26.359-08:002016-11-16T14:51:26.359-08:00Sigh glad I type fast, because he is not worth muc...Sigh glad I type fast, because he is not worth much time. And I only spare this much because he so illustrates the insane rationalizations: Locam first says “you should be very very concerned about any educational system that awards Science degrees & doctorates based on popularity.”<br /><br />Yep. But then:<br /><br />“Yet, this is exactly what our accreditation-mad university education system does.”<br /><br />Utter, tizzy volcanically stupid lying horseshit. My own PHD is utter disproof of this. Science is spectacularly more honest than any other profession, for dozens of reasons, including the plain fact that scientists are the most COMPETITIVE human beings our species every produced. Conformity to paradigm gives us an ITCH.<br /><br />Are there flaws and failings? Yes we are human. But the speed and accuracy and thoroughness of investigations of these flaws is the envy of any honest person in any other profession. It is WHY right wing (and some left) twits get their ammo to hurl at science. For locum to hurl stones is utterly laughable.<br /><br />“Statistically speaking, however, it is this overwhelming uniformity of opinion that should give any critical thinker pause.”<br /><br />You twerps keep trying this line. Like calling Obama partisan because no republican would meet with him or negotiate a thing. Including the coming trumpist reforms (not repeals) to Obamacare. <br /><br />“Do servants, employees & grad students get promoted when they shame their masters, employers & supervising professors by proving them foolish?”<br /><br />You know nothing about science Goombah, and it terrifies you. I am living proof that your railing raves are lies. Competitive post docs who want to challenge the paradigm, need to be “hot” in order to pull it off, that's true… but tens of thousands do it, every year. And the top 25% get promoted very fast precisely BECAUSE they topple established models. You know nothing whatsoever about science.<br /><br />Repeat. You know nothing whatsoever about science. But I do believe your descriptions apply to yourself and your friends. It is what you know. And it frightens you that there are better people out there. Vastly better than you.<br /><br />Were he sincere, he’d join in the demand that all House members announce a Science Advisor from his/her own district, to publicly answer all science questions and to serve in a science shadow congress that advises Congress on actual facts. Surely Red-Tea-Party Rep can find one such person back home, who is immune to the conformity locum rants about? <br /><br /> Oh… but he knows what would happen, and his balls shrivel at the thought. The Gopper Reps would refuse, knowing it's a trap. Because they'd have to pick someone who would then disagree with every Foxite stance... or else appoint an imbecile like Ben Carson, and watch what then happens on TV. The pyramids stored grain.<br /><br />YOUR very posting drips with the hatred of science that is your cult religion. <br /> And we scientists are not just smart and knowledgeable. <br />We know where your insane cult leads. Girodano Bruno. Treblinka. <br /><br />David Brinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14465315130418506525noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-29872833481272458262016-11-16T14:43:10.741-08:002016-11-16T14:43:10.741-08:00Tacitus, what is “proof?” When the GOP secretaries...Tacitus, what is “proof?” When the GOP secretaries of state block all scrutiny of their voting machines and processes which allow no paper audits? When tests show their machines to be easily hackable? <br /><br />When voter ID laws offer no compliance assistance? When officials openly avow to reducing voting hours and closing DMV offices “in order to reduce democratic votes.” <br /><br />When Jeb Bush accidentally “lost” 60,000 democratic registrations in 2000, allowing his brother to win by 167 votes?<br /><br />The “proof” is out of reach. But the stink isn’t. And right now the betting pool is when and what it will take for fellows like you to finally admit that Trump is not a temporary aberration, but a canker-symptom of something deeply and totally and utterly cancerous.<br />David Brinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14465315130418506525noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-66302695835570130452016-11-16T14:42:16.830-08:002016-11-16T14:42:16.830-08:00Do servants, employees & grad students get pro...<i>Do servants, employees & grad students get promoted when they shame their masters, employers & supervising professors by proving them foolish? Or, do they get promoted for obedience, pleasing their superiors & kissing-up?</i><br /><br />For servants and employees, yes. For grad students, no.<br /><br />Grad students get promoted by doing good work, which means improving on their supervising professors' work. If that work is wrong, that means they correct it and make it better.<br /><br />And grad students don't stay grad students forever, unlike servants and most employees. They become professors of their own. And if they have ideas that their supervising professors wouldn't let them pursue--well, they don't have supervising professors anymore, do they? ;)<br /><br />So where are all these professors who used to be grad students for other professors, writing papers describing how their old professors got it wrong? You get points for that, you know, so you should see that. Where are they?<br /><br />Science is not like business or servitude, no matter how much you wish it were.A.F. Reynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-57146020535672414582016-11-16T14:30:28.558-08:002016-11-16T14:30:28.558-08:00locumranch:
"Look, if I *argue* with you, I ...locumranch:<br /><i><br />"Look, if I *argue* with you, I must take up a contrary position!" <br /></i><br /><br />I'm not sure what your point was, but channeling the argument clinic sketch is like your entire shtick.<br /><br />LarryHartnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-53704664459520260572016-11-16T14:26:57.499-08:002016-11-16T14:26:57.499-08:00@Tacitus2,
I don't have a study at hand, but ...@Tacitus2,<br /><br />I don't have a study at hand, but did your reading not indicate that the polling is fairly accurate in states without un-auditable, proprietary voting machines? Because my understanding is that there is a correlation between the two. If so, then the machines seem to be more relevant than Trump.<br /><br />I acknowledge there are other factors to consider. I'm not saying to invalidate the election that is already done, but I am saying some investigation needs to be done, and not starting with the built-in assumptions that the machines are accurate.<br /><br />Separate issue--do you really think the "embarrassed to admit I'm voting for" vote all goes to Trump? I would think there were disgusted Republicans who might vote Hillary, but would be afraid to say so publicly, especially if her authoritarian husband expected different behavior.<br />LarryHartnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-62005749810904119942016-11-16T14:20:30.983-08:002016-11-16T14:20:30.983-08:00TimH globalization uplifted the world, as George M...TimH globalization uplifted the world, as George Marshall planned. American workers suffered, ye, but far far less that 3 billion poor people around the world benefited. And the American CONSUMER did great. So American workers are fed up? They could buy American! But that inconvenience is unnecessary, since inshoring has already begun, with automation and cheap natural gas and rising foreign wages all driving manufacturing back to the US.<br /><br />The “automation” part, alas, means there won’t be tons of jobs. But local Making will lower carbon footprints, so….<br />==<br /><br />Name another person who has talked about rigged voting machines without audit trails longer than I have.David Brinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14465315130418506525noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-73765581034503381372016-11-16T14:17:18.651-08:002016-11-16T14:17:18.651-08:00Exit polls are only going to be indicative, now th...Exit polls are only going to be indicative, now that your parties have become so "partisan" you need some way of auditing the results<br />Which really means a paper ballot<br /><br />IMHO the problems you are having are part of plan by some of your "founding fathers" who actually didn't like democracy<br />They decided that if these kids(citizens) like chocolate (democracy) so much we will give them an overdose and make them sick of it<br />So they had you vote for a whole lot of posts that the rest of us use a career civil service for<br /><br />If you are only voting for your MP the ballot is simple and it's easy to have an audit trail<br />If you are voting for fifty other positions it becomes much more difficult - you can't simply put the paper ballot into a pile <br /><br />This may be of interest<br />http://www.elections.org.nz/events/2014-general-election/2014-parties-candidates-and-third-parties/election-day-rules-candidat-0<br /> duncan cairncrosshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14153725128216947145noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-10911629241083126432016-11-16T14:13:49.829-08:002016-11-16T14:13:49.829-08:00@Deuxglass while I agree we really need to have pa...@Deuxglass while I agree we really need to have paper trails for our voting, I have to ask. If one side is stealing elections why would THEY change the system to something harder to rig?<br /><br />Where I am I have NO way to know if there is cheating or not. They use touch screen pads for voting machines and they could EASILY be tampered with before or after an election as far as I know and there is NO PAPER TRAIL WHATSOEVER. How this is acceptable I have no idea, but it is cheap and being a red state THAT is probably the driver more than anything.Berialnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-25158580967077295922016-11-16T13:47:11.755-08:002016-11-16T13:47:11.755-08:00Deuxglass:
I have no problem with people who do s...Deuxglass:<br /><i><br />I have no problem with people who do selfies with their ballot. It is their decision. Personally I think it's stupid because since it is on their FB.<br /></i><br /><br />Well, I don't have a problem with people posting how they voted, but I do have a problem with allowing people to <b>prove</b> who they voted for, because that empowers vote-buying and blackmail (by an employer or otherwise).<br />LarryHartnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-17227679890585607252016-11-16T12:47:18.414-08:002016-11-16T12:47:18.414-08:00As to evidence that exit polls may be less reliabl...As to evidence that exit polls may be less reliable these days...<br /><br />Pew Research has an informative discussion on this at:http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/11/02/just-how-does-the-general-election-exit-poll-work-anyway/<br /><br />A couple of relevent parts:<br /><br />"Edison’s response rate on its exit polls is considerably higher than is typical for phone surveys, Lenski said – about 45% of the voters the firm approaches agree to fill out questionnaires. But, he added, “Response rates in exit polls have gone down, but a lot more gradually than with traditional telephone surveys. When I started in this business, the response rate was more like 60%."<br /><br />So the number of voters whose behaviour must be guessed at is greater. It indeed appears to be a majority.<br /><br />So how do they do it?<br /><br />“Since we are at the polling place, our interviewers can record some characteristics of voters who decline to take part in the survey – approximate age, gender and race – so we can adjust our results for those factors,” Lenski said. “But there are other items we can’t account for visually. People don’t have a D or an R stamped on their foreheads, and you don’t know as they walk past you whether or not they have a college degree.”<br /><br />You could certainly speculate that the exit polls are correct and that massive fraud is being perpetrated. But the absence of evidence for the latter, and the GIGO potential of the former has to be considered.<br /><br />If in light of the invective directed against potential Trump voters the non response rates were only a few percentage points higher then the exit polls become crap. If your assumptions based on observing voters are flawed ("Hispanic looking....clearly a Clinton supporter!), you again will end up looking foolish.<br /><br />I am not saying we should discount election machine hijinks. I am more willing to look at that than some people are to consider fraud perpetrated by ineligible voters.<br /><br />But some of you are Kubler-Rossing pretty hard on this.<br /><br />TacitusTacitushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17007086196578740689noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-15405513675646930092016-11-16T12:20:54.566-08:002016-11-16T12:20:54.566-08:00Do servants, employees & grad students get pro...<br /><br />Do servants, employees & grad students get promoted when they shame their masters, employers & supervising professors by proving them foolish? Or, do they get promoted for obedience, pleasing their superiors & kissing-up?<br /><br />And what does the man-on-the-street have to gain by telling pollsters the truth?locumranchnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-25588925088534021562016-11-16T12:08:19.464-08:002016-11-16T12:08:19.464-08:00TCB,
Flipping around my sentence would give “Peop...TCB,<br /><br />Flipping around my sentence would give “People are worthless because exit polls lie” which is in itself an interesting statement. I suppose you mean to say that the exit polls were right but that there was widespread electoral fraud and that is a moot point. If we can find convincing evidence then that would be serious but you have to find the evidence first before making accusations.<br /> <br />If you read articles in journals in the Polling industry they admit that they have detected a significant increase in lying in the last 10 years or so and it has become a major problem for them. Their livelihood depends of accurate predictions. It seems that the closer the questions become personal, the more the lying. A pollster has no way of knowing who is telling the truth and who isn’t and there is no way to compel them to give a true answer. It's not just a problem with political polling, it goes down even when they ask people what their favorite breakfast cereal. <br />Deuxglassnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-39438714527976502512016-11-16T11:42:01.374-08:002016-11-16T11:42:01.374-08:00Indeed, David offers you accurate information when...<i>Indeed, David offers you accurate information when he reports that (A) "98% of all Climate Scientists believe that AGW is a very real & imminent threat" and (B) "only around 6 percent of U.S. scientists are Republicans" only to conclude that all 'Real Scientists are progressive' & all US Republicans are 'anti-science'.<br /><br />Statistically speaking, however, it is this overwhelming uniformity of opinion that should give any critical thinker pause. Which of the following hypothesis best explains these overwhelming uniformities, remembering that human beings tend to be 'lying liars'?<br /><br />A. The near unanimous agreement of all Climate Scientists springs from either (1) Independent Analysis by disparate scientists or (2) Pre-Selection Bias of potential scientists?</i><br /><br />Well over 98% of scientists also believe in gravity. Does this mean there is pre-selection bias of potential scientists?<br /><br />Or do you want to jump off a cliff to test that, too? ;)<br /><br />The basic science (more CO2 in the atmosphere traps more heat) is undisputed, even by climate change deniers. And climate scientists are constantly checking their work, by trying to refine their results. If after 50 years of testing and refining, they haven't found a significant problem with the models, then scientists in general accept them as being generally accurate. And they all show that climate change is human induced.<br /><br />Is it really so strange that 98% of scientists are confident in the process of science?<br /><br />And don't forget, there is a large group of skeptics who are checking the work of older scientists every year. A bunch of guys who want to make a name for themselves, who think they know everything, and love to pick apart every argument just for the fun of it. They are called Grad Students. The next generation of scientists. And they would love to show their professors up and prove they are smarter than the old guys.<br /><br />For 50 years, they haven't found the flaws, either.<br /><br />So, yeah, answer (1) is the most likely.<br />A.F. Reynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-91478206159785992492016-11-16T11:38:30.318-08:002016-11-16T11:38:30.318-08:00LarryHart,
I have no problem with people who do s...LarryHart,<br /><br />I have no problem with people who do selfies with their ballot. It is their decision. Personally I think it's stupid because since it is on their FB. If they are looking for a new job he had better hope that the Human Resource person has the same political views, otherwise he is cooked.Deuxglassnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-10003815711327426712016-11-16T10:58:59.654-08:002016-11-16T10:58:59.654-08:00@Tim_W:
"Look, if I *argue* with you, I mu...<br />@Tim_W: <br /><br />"Look, if I *argue* with you, I must take up a contrary position!" <br />"Yes but it isn't just saying 'no it isn't'.<br />"Yes it is!"<br />"No it isn't!"<br />"Yes it is!"<br /><br />David, I hope, understands this reference to the MP Argument Sketch.locumranchnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-66817914673661076232016-11-16T10:44:08.554-08:002016-11-16T10:44:08.554-08:00Human beings are lying liars to begin with, so muc...<br /><br />Human beings are lying liars to begin with, so much so that the recent ham-handed progressive attempts to label & libel their conservative opponents as 'sexist, racist, anti-science Nazis' can only lead to further political polarisation & more exit poll lying.<br /><br />https://www.technologyreview.com/s/528326/simulations-reveal-how-white-lies-glue-society-together-and-black-lies-create-diversity/<br /><br />That's why exit polls, the Establishment & the MSM can no longer be trusted: They are all trying to force others to comply to their own sociopolitical agenda.<br /><br />But, enough about politics. Let's talk about Science, its politicisation & climate change.<br /><br />Assuming that accurate scientific & empiric observations require the elimination of inherent bias, then you should be very very concerned about any educational system that awards Science degrees & doctorates based on popularity. Yet, this is exactly what our accreditation-mad university education system does.<br /><br />It accredits new 'Science' degrees on the basis of popularity. Increasingly, any would-be scientist must conform to the established (often political) consensus of established scientists if they desire to join the Science Club, and this is especially true for the 'Climate Scientist' club.<br /><br />Indeed, David offers you accurate information when he reports that (A) "98% of all Climate Scientists believe that AGW is a very real & imminent threat" and (B) "only around 6 percent of U.S. scientists are Republicans" only to conclude that all 'Real Scientists are progressive' & all US Republicans are 'anti-science'.<br /><br />Statistically speaking, however, it is this overwhelming uniformity of opinion that should give any critical thinker pause. Which of the following hypothesis best explains these overwhelming uniformities, remembering that human beings tend to be 'lying liars'?<br /><br />A. The near unanimous agreement of all Climate Scientists springs from either (1) Independent Analysis by disparate scientists or (2) Pre-Selection Bias of potential scientists?<br /><br />B. 'All Real Scientists are progressive' because either (1) Science has a progressive bias or (2) those Scientists who train & approve new scientists have a progressive bias?<br /><br />Any thoughts?<br /><br /><br />Bestlocumranchnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-37115697496579701102016-11-16T09:31:18.538-08:002016-11-16T09:31:18.538-08:00@locumranch
It'll take much much more than th...@locumranch<br /><br /><i>It'll take much much more than the MAGA meme to get us off the sidelines, mostly because we've been so thoroughly marginalised for the last 3 generations: We won't work towards a better future if it's not our future; we won't fight global warming if it's not our globe; we won't protect a nation if it's not our nation; we won't build infrastructure if it's not our infrastructure; we won't defend women in general if they're not our women; and we won't provide for generic children if they're not our children.</i><br /><br />For goodness sake, Locum old chap, for a man who hangs about on a blog written by space scientist / SF author, you really could do with taking a step back and remembering the bigger picture. Take another look at Earth Rise. Listen to Sagan's Pale Blue Dot. Watch Wanderers (again, with narration by Carl Sagan).<br /><br />We are all in this together. There is no Going Galt. The universe couldn't care less whether we live or die, and from not very far away at all your rhetoric is as meaningless as green pond scum declaring its essential and fundamental difference to a slightly different shade of pond scum. Tim Wnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-30842572125663173002016-11-16T09:03:12.615-08:002016-11-16T09:03:12.615-08:00@Tacitus and others on exit polling...
No one is ...@Tacitus and others on exit polling...<br /><br />No one is suggesting that every individual answer is correct in an exit poll. What does seem to be the case is that for many decades, the methodology that the exit polls used turned out to be reliably accurate, and that that abruptly changed at the same time that un-auditable, proprietary voting machines started to be used. And that the exit polling is <b>still</b> reliable <b>except</b> where un-auditable, proprietary voting machines are used.<br /><br />No, that doesn't strictly prove something, but it does suggest something that needs further study. It's not enough to say "Well, the polls are wrong." Why did they suddenly start being so much more wrong than ever before (since 2000--not just this one election)?<br /><br />@Kal Kallevig,<br /><br />I think any serious suggestion about going back to paper ballots is for future elections, not past ones.<br /><br />LarryHartnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-7125987227873313842016-11-16T08:12:04.245-08:002016-11-16T08:12:04.245-08:00Deuxglass said...
Just go back to paper ballots a...Deuxglass said...<br /><br /><i>Just go back to paper ballots and have each one go by the representatives of all parties large and small.</i><br /><br />Are you calling for a do over of the election with paper ballots?<br />Kal Kallevignoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-2319763755406869352016-11-16T08:00:57.638-08:002016-11-16T08:00:57.638-08:00Deuxglass:
although I am sure some people would w...Deuxglass:<br /><i><br />although I am sure some people would want to do away with the secret ballot on grounds that it is old-fashioned.<br /></i><br /><br />The issue of ballot selfies is always presented as one of free expression--that millennials live on their phones, so they should be permitted to show their marked ballots the same way they show their food at a restaurant.<br /><br />The notion that this enables vote-buying is always dismissed as if it doesn't even factor into the discussion instead of being the whole <b>point</b> of the discussion. It reminds me of John Roberts's insistence that Citizens United wouldn't even lead to the appearance of corruption, let alone the real thing. Or the ruling in the 90s that allowing the Paula Jones lawsuit to proceed against the sitting president wouldn't affect much.LarryHartnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-2120920274984430532016-11-16T07:58:59.734-08:002016-11-16T07:58:59.734-08:00Correction: school BUS.Correction: school BUS.TCBhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08153506222271955110noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-87745814957565535722016-11-16T07:57:44.854-08:002016-11-16T07:57:44.854-08:00One more thing: I have never seen any real evidenc...One more thing: I have never seen any real evidence that large numbers of voters lie to exit pollsters. If anyone has any <i> actual evidence </i> on this assertion, I'd like to see it. <br /><br />I think it's a lot like the 'voter fraud' issue: just because we can imagine it and just because it's in the interest of some people to have us believe it, doesn't mean it's a statistically significant thing. You can take all the people who've actually been arrested for voter fraud in recent years and put them in a school bust, with seats to spare.<br /><br />How many people can we <i> prove </i> have lied in exit polls?<br /><br />Hardly any, to my knowledge. I think it's mostly a convenient myth, until shown real evidence otherwise.TCBhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08153506222271955110noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-84551990665860534992016-11-16T07:56:21.815-08:002016-11-16T07:56:21.815-08:00Anonymous:
We do have a political system that enc...Anonymous:<br /><i><br />We do have a political system that encourages the best in us---but only if we citizens encourage the best in our political system by participating in politics at all levels from local school boards, city councils, planning commissions, state legislatures and beyond.<br /></i><br /><br />And unfortunately, the lesson of Trump (and to a lesser extent, Obama too) is that there's no point starting low and working your way up. It's quicker, easier, more seductive (like the Dark Side of the Force) to just go for the CEO position right off.<br />LarryHartnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-47904575459976704482016-11-16T07:45:44.716-08:002016-11-16T07:45:44.716-08:00@ Deuxglass:
Paper ballots aren't even that m...@ Deuxglass:<br /><br />Paper ballots aren't even that much slower. Did people really have to wait that long before? Think of the movie Abe Lincoln In Illinois; at the end, Raymond Massey and company are in Springfield getting results off the telegraph, and they don't need to wait much longer that we did in 2016.<br /><br />Also, let me flip your statement: "Exit polls are worthless because people lie."<br /><br />How about this: "Official results are worthless because people lie."<br /><br />Now, we're supposed to agree that this is not the case for official election results; but it sure seems like special pleading. We've just come off an election where a whole lot of people lied about almost every topic you can think of, and some you can't.<br /><br />But we're supposed to believe that officials with much to gain and lose, and who are known to lie about many other things, are telling the truth <i> about this one particular thing </i>. And we can't really verify it. We don't have the access to all the raw data, nor were we in the room when the tallies were done, and in some states there is no paper trail at all...<br /><br />But they're telling the truth about this one thing?<br /><br />I do not buy it. The weird glitches and 'lucky breaks' help the GOP nine times out of ten. If this happened in the Super Bowl the fans would pour from the stands and riot in the field, the locker rooms, the parking lot. Because people care about sports. But don't even get me started about sports. God, I hate sports... sucking the brains of American 'citizens'...TCBhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08153506222271955110noreply@blogger.com