“They saw their injured country's woe;
The flaming town, the wasted field;
Then rushed to meet the insulting foe;
They took the spear, - but left the shield.”
I think your bumper sticker kitten is rather crude and reductionist.
I worked for 10 years or so as a material development engineer (specifically synthetic elastomers). Comparison studies between own/competitor products was a big part of it and I don't recall ever being leaned on by management to suppress data that didn't favour own product. At worst we might 'lie by omission' on one or two data points.
Customers also organised double blind tests where there nowhere to hide. We took part if we felt the test was honest, regardless of the anticipated outcome.
Your point that science is basically one big falsification is a nonsense.
So the critique of oil company researchers vis "global warming" is both crude and reductionist? Careful, someone will soon take away your "progressive" card.
ps - Do you believe that NASA is and NOAA aren't actively 'adjusting' the global temperature datasets? I know when we used to run speed trials of out cargo ships, we'd pencil whip the fuel energy content numbers to reflect its' actual tested energy content if we needed to get a few extra hundredths of a mile per barrel of Bunker C if we didn't make the rate on the first pass. These are legitimate methods... but applied only to exceed a certain threshold when the numbers are close.
Thomas Sowell when he worked for the Labor Department...
Sowell’s first job after his receiving his PhD in economics was working for the Department of Labor, and he says it was there that he realized Marxism was not the answer. He argues that the government has its own institutional interests in inequality that cannot be explained through Marxism. He began to be discouraged by Marxism and the government in general and began searching for better economic ideas and solutions (the free market).
What about those who aren't funded or self-fund?
ReplyDeleteThey agree with themselves...
ReplyDeleteI think your bumper sticker kitten is rather crude and reductionist.
ReplyDeleteI worked for 10 years or so as a material development engineer (specifically synthetic elastomers). Comparison studies between own/competitor products was a big part of it and I don't recall ever being leaned on by management to suppress data that didn't favour own product. At worst we might 'lie by omission' on one or two data points.
Customers also organised double blind tests where there nowhere to hide. We took part if we felt the test was honest, regardless of the anticipated outcome.
Your point that science is basically one big falsification is a nonsense.
So the critique of oil company researchers vis "global warming" is both crude and reductionist? Careful, someone will soon take away your "progressive" card.
ReplyDeleteps - Do you believe that NASA is and NOAA aren't actively 'adjusting' the global temperature datasets? I know when we used to run speed trials of out cargo ships, we'd pencil whip the fuel energy content numbers to reflect its' actual tested energy content if we needed to get a few extra hundredths of a mile per barrel of Bunker C if we didn't make the rate on the first pass. These are legitimate methods... but applied only to exceed a certain threshold when the numbers are close.
ReplyDelete:)
ReplyDeleteI'm inclined to agree with Tony Heller that something fishy is going on (starting around 26 minutes in).
ReplyDeleteImagine if the unemployment office had nothing to do.
ReplyDeleteThomas Sowell when he worked for the Labor Department...
ReplyDeleteSowell’s first job after his receiving his PhD in economics was working for the Department of Labor, and he says it was there that he realized Marxism was not the answer. He argues that the government has its own institutional interests in inequality that cannot be explained through Marxism. He began to be discouraged by Marxism and the government in general and began searching for better economic ideas and solutions (the free market).