Jerry Coffey @jcoffey

http://thetwidgetlog.com/

  • Posts
    195
  • Followers
    43
  • Following
    90
Red sky at morning... So many fires around us. Not near us, for now.
  • Comments 0

Red sky at morning... So many fires around us. Not near us, for now.

Advertising
The gangs all here!
  • Comments 0

The gangs all here!

The naked ladies are back!
  • Comments 0

The naked ladies are back!

Once upon a time #ShastaCollege had a #Waterfall. This is an animated gif I had made in 2000 for the Library web page.
  • Comments 2

Once upon a time #ShastaCollege had a #Waterfall. This is an animated gif I had made in 2000 for the Library web page.

Advertising
Good morning you busy bees!
  • Comments 0

Good morning you busy bees!

We are what we eat!
  • Comments 1

We are what we eat!

Apple maps car spotted in Redding
  • Comments 0

Apple maps car spotted in Redding

Advertising
Sunset on Wednesday.
  • Comments 0

Sunset on Wednesday.

This is an unusual duck? Understand it's mate was injured and he/she has hung around.
  • Comments 0

This is an unusual duck? Understand it's mate was injured and he/she has hung around.

Here is a copy from a tweet about Carl Sagans baloney detector.  Worth a read.  Wherever possible there must be independent confirmation of the “facts.”
Encourage substantive debate on the evidence by knowledgeable proponents of all points of view.
Arguments from authority carry little weight — “authorities” have made mistakes in the past. They will do so again in the future. Perhaps a better way to say it is that in science there are no authorities; at most, there are experts.
Spin more than one hypothesis. If there’s something to be explained, think of all the different ways in which it could be explained. Then think of tests by which you might systematically disprove each of the alternatives.
Try not to get overly attached to a hypothesis just because it’s yours. It’s only a way station in the pursuit of knowledge. Ask yourself why you like the idea. Compare it fairly with the alternatives. See if you can find reasons for rejecting it. If you don’t, others will.
If whatever it is you’re explaining has some measure, some numerical quantity attached to it, you’ll be much better able to discriminate among competing hypotheses. What is vague and qualitative is open to many explanations.
If there’s a chain of argument, every link in the chain must work (including the premise) — not just most of them.
Occam’s Razor. This convenient rule-of-thumb urges us when faced with two hypotheses that explain the data equally well to choose the simpler. Always ask whether the hypothesis can be, at least in principle, falsified…. You must be able to check assertions out. Inveterate skeptics must be given the chance to follow your reasoning, to duplicate your experiments and see if they get the same result.
  • Comments 1

Here is a copy from a tweet about Carl Sagans baloney detector. Worth a read. Wherever possible there must be independent confirmation of the “facts.” Encourage substantive debate on the evidence by knowledgeable proponents of all points of view. Arguments from authority carry little weight — “authorities” have made mistakes in the past. They will do so again in the future. Perhaps a better way to say it is that in science there are no authorities; at most, there are experts. Spin more than one hypothesis. If there’s something to be explained, think of all the different ways in which it could be explained. Then think of tests by which you might systematically disprove each of the alternatives. Try not to get overly attached to a hypothesis just because it’s yours. It’s only a way station in the pursuit of knowledge. Ask yourself why you like the idea. Compare it fairly with the alternatives. See if you can find reasons for rejecting it. If you don’t, others will. If whatever it is you’re explaining has some measure, some numerical quantity attached to it, you’ll be much better able to discriminate among competing hypotheses. What is vague and qualitative is open to many explanations. If there’s a chain of argument, every link in the chain must work (including the premise) — not just most of them. Occam’s Razor. This convenient rule-of-thumb urges us when faced with two hypotheses that explain the data equally well to choose the simpler. Always ask whether the hypothesis can be, at least in principle, falsified…. You must be able to check assertions out. Inveterate skeptics must be given the chance to follow your reasoning, to duplicate your experiments and see if they get the same result.

Advertising
Shasta lake is full, too full. They are lowering the level to prepare for more rain.
  • Comments 0

Shasta lake is full, too full. They are lowering the level to prepare for more rain.

I found this laying around on twitter.
  • Comments 0

I found this laying around on twitter.

NEXT