Science is mostly crap

It doesn't start out that way but it seems that people like to mix the crap in when they get done with their experiments. An example is data on global warming. The facts may not be in dispute, but the implied conclusion and the manipulation is there nonetheless. Let's take just two facts.

  1. Global warming will cause the death of 20,00 people per year from increased heat deaths.
  2. Global warming will reduce the number of cold related deaths by 120,000
These figures are not accurate and are just presented to make the point of how information is used to manipulate people if they are not careful.I don't have a side on the issue as I don't have enough data or tools to analyze it yet.

I only tell you fact one then it would seem that if you trust the methods, that you must assume that global warming will kill 20,000 people and that is bad. If I was a chicken and didn't do my proper work at negative proofs, then I would just go on clucking and accept this as the way to deal with the problem.

Now to a real example from todays news. A new study says that vitamin D can help to keep a person healthy and more survivable from several different diseases. This is the data and though it would seem to imply a certain conclusion, it is used to manipulate the chicken mind that is getting it. If you only test for what you want to know about, then the results are going to be wrong. I don't say that Vitamin D is not useful for some things, it is just that the experiment is only testing a few of the millions of consequences of a particular cause. The data doesn't say that this is the best solution, the only solution, doesn't cause some other condition, is easy to implement, is true for all people, is true for every race, is only true at this particular time, is only true for people who don't drink milk, is only true because people have been scared into staying out of the sun because of cancer risk, it increases anxiety, leads to early onset dementia, etc.... This is the critical flaw with the association of particular genes and some measured effect. It varies with the gene and the organism. I could do a knockout ( removal of a gene ) of tRNA for a specific amino acid and might say that it has no effect. The problem with that is there are multiple copies of the same gene. Until you have a complete model of the system, every thing that you do is going to be questionable and just as likely to have adverse consequences as good ones.

If you do not have a complete model of a system, you are just shooting in the dark when you draw conclusions from limited data


Automated Intelligence

Automated Intelligence
Auftrag der unendlichen LOL katzen