Science & Society
Neil deGrasse Tyson PhD invoked the
fact he had a PhD and Tchiya Amet El Maat did not have a PhD to imply that
he is necessarily more credible than her. Furthermore, he used her beliefs
against her. His explanation was pure argumentum ad verecundiam, appeal to
authority a logical fallacy and that it protected him for so long is part of this story. A conclusion reached from a flawed
premise, that he is an authoritative scientist and therefore he must be
correct, is itself flawed. He is not the only one scientist, or nonscientist,
who makes that mistake. In the words of Richard Feynman a scientist is just as dumb as the next guy when working outside his/her field.
Like that your child's modern baby seat can't erupt in flame? Thank the Roman military of almost 2,000 years ago. Like heating up your recyclable pouch of avocado toast points in the microwave? Thank the American military of World War II,(1) when Raytheon engineer Percy Spencer discovered their culinary benefit while working on RADAR.(2)
The Guardian, official newspaper of those in the anti-science left who still like to pretend they love science, knows what pays the bills...and it ain't science.
Yes, some real scientists write there, because it's mainstream media and scientists who do outreach want to be in as many publications as they can, but for the most part Guardian editors distrust science, because their audience does. And they love celebrities, for the same reason.
In 2006, former Vice-President and global warming clarion Al Gore said we only had 10 years to stop CO2 emissions or it would be too late. More cynical people noted that he came up with that 10-year figure because it was two years from his rematch contest for U.S. President plus eight he expected to be in office. It's beyond me to know if that was ever his intent, but if it was, perhaps a Peace Prize and an Academy Award made political campaigning too petty. He never ran again.
It may not feel like science wins often in court but it beat out activists last week.
Not only did science, and Science 2.0, win, it was a unanimous decision at the highest court in the land, the Supreme Court of the United States. And the ruling dealt a serious blow to "sue and settle" agreements with trial lawyer groups, in this case Center for Biological Diversity, along with limiting the power of the federal government to bully and intimidate landowners.
Fox and National Geographic are investigating the allegations
made against Neil DeGrasse Tyson of sexual misconduct
reported on by David G McAfee. In an AP story, which does not mention the
rape allegation, that she had no idea there were any allegations at all. If
one uses Google, and sets the search parameters for certain dates one can prove
that MANY MANY SOURCES had written about Tchiya Amet’s allegation. I will not
use any …. card but it is very very interesting that this only gets coverage
when the right kind of victim arises.
Do you want to believe that your car grill is determined by your personality or that lap dancers get better tips when they are ovulating? You probably like evolutionary psychology. Want to believe that surveys of psychology undergraduates at elite schools represent humanity, without the expense and risk of dealing with real people, who can be pretty sketchy? Social psychology is for you.(1)
Scientists don't think much of either and would prefer they stay in the humanities buildings, because evolutionary psychologists want to make everything about sex, while social psychologists claim there are no differences between sexes.
Women May Earn Just 49 Cents on the Dollar, is the title of an article
by Annie Lowrey in The Atlantic
It's only below the fold that, after laying out lots of links and obfuscation and conflicting claims designed to make the audience believe the situation is oh so complicated that we get this quiet disclaimer:
John Wiley & Sons Inc., the global academic publishing house with nearly $2 billion in revenue, recently got embroiled in a Twitter controversy about the efforts of one publication to go open access.
In his just published final book, "Brief Answers to the Big Questions," physicist Satephen Hawking wrote, "There is no God. No one directs the universe" but in a universe where only 6% of what must exist is even matter that can be detected, the science community is unwilling to be as definitive as he was.
It may be that God is in the gaps, and different people have different definitions for what that is. Yet it may be perpetuating the false narrative that religion is on one pole and science is on another.