We had the fourth Broken Science Initiative event this past Saturday at the Castro Ranch in Aromas, California. Which is apparently where CrossFit got its start. Standing room only. Terrific crowd. Good questions. Tacos. And a Mariachi band! Greg Glassman and I spoke. The talks were recorded and will be put on the
Solipsism is predictively rife among climate change models who undress on NYC subway cars during abnormally hot days and practice catoptromancy by taking smart phone selfies of their sweating bodies.
Science is not prediction or prophecy, Science is a "Hypothesis" which, if true, gives a result under a precise set of conditions.
Without the Hypothesis, it is voodoo.
Sometimes the physics behind the Hypothesis is (partly) understood, e.g. Boyle's law and many times it is not, e.g. Newton's gravity hypothesis.
Scientific method consists of testing the hypothesis, either by experiment or by observation of data.
The problem with science was explained by Patrick Flanagan, who observed that as the hypothesis was tested, instead of reducing the possible causes and results and eliminating various hypotheses, the normal occurrence was for the number of hypotheses to increase as additional data was added.
Sorry William but my dictionary would disagree. Neither Model nor Theory will necessarily provide predictions. Only in very specific usage of the words.
Your twitter thread very clearly moves from a theory (I assume you start with 'Y was a result of X') to a hypothesis. If you state 'If X then Y' that is a hypothesis, not a model or a theory.
God created the Universe is a theory, as it cannot be tested, it is not a hypothesis.
God will create a Universe within a measurable period of time under certain conditions, is a hypothesis which time will confirm or prove an error.
The Big Bang Theory is exactly that, it is not testable, it is also not science. No more scientific than Creationism or Intelligent Design.
The hypothesis that given sufficient monkeys with sufficient typewriters and sufficient time, the complete works of William Shakespeare will be duplicated is quite different than the theory that the works were in fact created by monkeys.
Well if you include proving that biting the heads off chickens kills them, then yes.
But then you have to ask Are there "Zombie" chickens? (No Felicia, Politicians are zombies, they are headless and they are chickens, but it does not confirm the conjecture.)
Yes, Virginia, there’re tons of bipeds with broad flat nails, not only featherless but mindless & heartless to boot. Doncha dare hide behind the demure Felicia’s behind! 😝
Solipsism is predictively rife among climate change models who undress on NYC subway cars during abnormally hot days and practice catoptromancy by taking smart phone selfies of their sweating bodies.
💬 which no after-the-fact excuses allowed.
Your enemies managed to insert only the puniest of typos—likely appalled at the blinding clarity of your writing 🤭
Very interesting, thank you.
See PJ's comments below.
Then see this tweet thread. There just in LOGICAL difference between model, theory, law, hypothesis, whatever.
https://twitter.com/FamedCelebrity/status/1665825670709284864
Sorry but you are completely wrong.
Science is not prediction or prophecy, Science is a "Hypothesis" which, if true, gives a result under a precise set of conditions.
Without the Hypothesis, it is voodoo.
Sometimes the physics behind the Hypothesis is (partly) understood, e.g. Boyle's law and many times it is not, e.g. Newton's gravity hypothesis.
Scientific method consists of testing the hypothesis, either by experiment or by observation of data.
The problem with science was explained by Patrick Flanagan, who observed that as the hypothesis was tested, instead of reducing the possible causes and results and eliminating various hypotheses, the normal occurrence was for the number of hypotheses to increase as additional data was added.
So he gave up science and wrote books instead.
PJ,
Model, theory, hypothesis. It's all the same.
Sorry William but my dictionary would disagree. Neither Model nor Theory will necessarily provide predictions. Only in very specific usage of the words.
Your twitter thread very clearly moves from a theory (I assume you start with 'Y was a result of X') to a hypothesis. If you state 'If X then Y' that is a hypothesis, not a model or a theory.
God created the Universe is a theory, as it cannot be tested, it is not a hypothesis.
God will create a Universe within a measurable period of time under certain conditions, is a hypothesis which time will confirm or prove an error.
The Big Bang Theory is exactly that, it is not testable, it is also not science. No more scientific than Creationism or Intelligent Design.
The hypothesis that given sufficient monkeys with sufficient typewriters and sufficient time, the complete works of William Shakespeare will be duplicated is quite different than the theory that the works were in fact created by monkeys.
Isn't voodoo kinda hypothesis? 😏 Just small-h fo' sho' 😁
Well if you include proving that biting the heads off chickens kills them, then yes.
But then you have to ask Are there "Zombie" chickens? (No Felicia, Politicians are zombies, they are headless and they are chickens, but it does not confirm the conjecture.)
Yes, Virginia, there’re tons of bipeds with broad flat nails, not only featherless but mindless & heartless to boot. Doncha dare hide behind the demure Felicia’s behind! 😝