Why do we spend so much time teaching it?
To me, understanding how we developed the knowledge is key to understanding the science itself.
Why do we spend so much time teaching it?
To me, understanding how we developed the knowledge is key to understanding the science itself.
This is sort of a disaster, particularly in the context of the student-loan mess.
Here's the horrifying key table from the paper Siddhartha Roy co-authored on perverse incentives in academia. #AAASmtg pic.twitter.com/sdrUlPmXs7
— Mike 48% Tⓐylor (@MikeTaylor) February 18, 2017
Is it on the verge of resurrection? That would be pretty cool. I wonder if they’d be as smart as elephants?
This is a beautiful taxonomy. The root of a great deal of suffering is people believing their field is level 3, when it's actually level 4. pic.twitter.com/8yg2sRocNL
— Will Wilson (@WAWilsonIV) February 15, 2017
Climate science is currently somewhere between levels 4 and 5, but many (particularly ignorant adherents of the climate religion) think that it’s at 2 or 1.
This is an amazing shot.
I hate the phrase “Climategate” (I prefer “Climaquiddick”) but it seems to have stuck. In any event, I don’t know whether or not this is true, but if it were to be, it would surprise me not at all.
[Monday-evening update]
Judith Curry has the latest on the foofaraw.
[Bumped]
…is bad news for those seeking certainty. Nice to see articles like this at places like The Guardian.
He’s having a climate meltdown. Which reminds me: Did he ever get that vasectomy?
You'd have to have a heart of neutronium to read these tweets from bed wetter @EricHolthaus and not laugh out loud. https://t.co/lLpNEq3rIG
— Rand Simberg (@Rand_Simberg) January 11, 2017
[Update mid morning]
He and Holthaus should just curl up in a fetal position together. https://t.co/jZ7SBSMoqf
— Rand Simberg (@Rand_Simberg) January 11, 2017
…may have an important function.
I’m always amazed at the hubris of people who think that, just because they can’t figure it out, something evolved in humans has no purpose.