Earth Day celebrators think they are “following the science.” Here’s what they assume: Here’s what Aristotle said 2400 years ago: Aristotle said, if we do not follow these rules, we are not doing science. This is the scientific method. Few people understand it. Some people think the scientific method is just being honest or checking […]
Ed Berry, PhD, Theoretical Physics, CCM Caltech had an honor system when I attended. I am sure they still do. The honor system means we are truthful to our fellow students and to our teachers. It means we would not steal from, cheat, or harm others. We would compete fiercely to win in games. But
by Terry Oldberg I am attempting to correct an error in Wikipedia’s article on Earth’s climate system as it is currently written. Unfortunately, Wikipedia will not let me update its article. The error is to mistake an “abstract” event of the future for Earth’s climate system for a “concrete” event of the future for this
Courtesy of Elon Musk, some things we should know to think logically. Fundamental Attribution Error. When someone is late, it’s because they’re lazy. But if you’re late, it was the traffic. Self-Serving Bias. Attributing your successes to your skill and your screw ups to bad luck. In-Group Favoritism. Tendency to favor those in our group over those who are
Micheal Crichton describes the fundamental political problem of climate change: it is a religion promoted by nutcases who dismiss facts, logic, and science that contradicts their environmental belief. I have taken the liberty to bold some of his sentences to make his message more clear. – Ed by Michael Crichton Caltech Michelin Lecture January 17, 2003
by Mark J. Perry, AEI (excerpt) As part of my series of posts this week to recognize the green holy day called Earth Day, here’s what Michael Crichton had to say about “scientific consensus” back in 2003 when he gave a lecture at the California Institute of Technology titled “Aliens Cause Global Warming” (emphasis mine):
“Now I’m going to discuss how we would look for a new law. In general, we look for a new law by the following process. “First, we guess it (audience laughter), no, don’t laugh, that’s the truth. Then we compute the consequences of the guess, to see if this law we guess is right, to
by Dr. Ed Berry Here’s the untold story behind my first scientific publication where you may find the story more interesting than the publication itself. It’s a story about how what we may think is so, is not so. It’s a story that attracted a lot of attention because it showed a logic error in simple physics made
by Maria Popova, Brain Pickings Necessary cognitive fortification against propaganda, pseudoscience, and general falsehood. Carl Sagan was many things — a cosmic sage,voracious reader, hopeless romantic, andbrilliant philosopher. But above all, he endures as our era’s greatest patron saint of reason and common sense, a master of the vital balance between skepticism and openness. In
by William Happer, Professor of Physics, Princeton University, WSJ During a fundraiser in Atlanta earlier this month, President Obama is reported to have said: “It gets you a little nervous about what is happening to global temperatures. When it is 75 degrees in Chicago in the beginning of March, you start thinking. On the other
by Dr. Ed Berry Introduction to the AGW problem Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) is the hypothesis that human emissions of CO2 due to burning fossil fuels are causing dangerous global warming. AGW proponents claim AGW is so dangerous that we must drastically reduce our fossil fuel CO2 emissions in order to stop the disastrous effects
by Dr. Ed Berry Here is an easy way to illustrate the common logical fallacy called “affirming the consequent. Consider the following logic statement: If Human CO2 causes global warming Then Human CO2 may cause glaciers to melt. (A implies B.) Glaciers are melting. Therefore, Human CO2 causes global warming. (B implies A.) It is
