- I read Instapundit every now and then just to get an updated glimpse of what some real loons think. It's a bit disturbing that this guy has the following he does, but every once in a while I get a good laugh. Like this one decrying the loss of trust of science because of ``climategate.'' Really? People read this nonsense and think they're being informed? As if these people believed the scientists before these emails?
- I cringe whenever I see/hear someone using "whomever" incorrectly. It's one thing failing to use "whom" when called for, but if you're going to go through the trouble of using "whom," you'd better get it right. There's got to be a good analogy here, but I'm not coming up with one.
- I've had it yet again with certain of my collaborators who are putting out papers with others, but letting the paper I wrote with their names on it go ignored. This kind of stuff gets to me more than it would probably to most. And it doesn't help that I somehow have this yucky habit of being like George W. Bush with friends...that is, friends are either good or evil, and once they cross the line, they ain't my friend no more. I call this yucky, because, as might be obvious to everyone but me, friends are still useful (too clinical a word, but I can't come up with a touchy-feely replacement word) even when they aren't perfect. When I was a kid, I'd go through a new best friend every year or two, having literally stopped talking to each in turn. As I became an adult, this behavior continued with colleagues who had betrayed me in some sense. So, needless to say, I'm not great at networking, but I sabotage what meager efforts I do make with this inability to appreciate the good over the bad. Even describing this, I can't really overcome it. I imagine this was a learned behavior, so maybe I should be able to overcome it?
- Read a quote by Leno recently that I thought made some sense, paraphrasing:
Democrats like people in general, but no one in particular, while Republicans like people in particular, but no one in general. - If you're going to try audiobooks, I really recommend Scott Brick as a reader.
- In general, I don't contribute money (e.g. charities, political candidates, etc), so I had to do a little research. As far as I can tell, the recent activities of our most-esteemed court in the land lift the limits on corporate money for political "speech." But, what about the limits on my free speech? They're still there right? So if I were a true patriot with my own very profitable company, I'd have "my people" find some real despicable candidate in some small-scale election with no shot of winning. And then I'd spend all the money necessary to get this person elected. Maybe Larry Flint reads this blog.
Presenting the "other" side of academic physics, where people backstab and give lousy talks. Where people are sometimes lazy or incompetent, and the best don't get the credit or the job. From the perspective of someone lucky enough to have landed a tenure-track professorship.
Tuesday, January 26, 2010
Corporate Entity
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Since when do we have to "believe" scientists?
"When someone says, 'Science teaches such and such,' he is using the word incorrectly. Science doesn't teach anything; experience teaches it. If they say to you, 'Science has shown such and such,' you might ask, 'How does science show it? How did the scientists find out? How? What? Where?'
It should not be 'science has shown' but 'this experiment, this effect, has shown.' And you have as much right as anyone else, upon hearing about the experiments--but be patient and listen to all the evidence--to judge whether a sensible conclusion has been arrived at." (Richard Feynman, Physics Teacher Vol. 7, issue 6, 1968, pp. 313-320)
If "Climategate" teaches us anything, it is that these so-called "climate scientiests" where doing everything in their power not to answer the "How, What, Where" questions.
Johan,
It is not I who mentions "faith" and "believing" but instead the post to which I referred. My point is simply to point out the lunacy of some of these people who claim these emails have shaken their trust in these scientists when these same people never believed them to begin with.
Post a Comment