Layman struggles with Science
10-16-2010, 11:20 PM
RE: Layman struggles with Science
(10-16-2010 03:19 PM)Sunsettommy Wrote: "There is no fully open window in IR area.But it is close (10%) and when the photons are moving at around 135,000 per second a number does leave without stopping.
One of the points I am trying to make in this thread, about this specific point is,
10% over what distance. ?
As I understand, Motl asks / suggests,
1) Is the hypothesis good enough to be tested.
2) Is the test relevant to test the hypothesis in the way it is intended / portrayed to.
3) Are the measurements accurate enough for the test.
4) How accurate are the measurements, and are the measurements of what it is that is supposed to be tested.
5) Given problems 1 to 4 would any statistical analysis be relevant anyway.
6) Given 1 to 5 does the scientist understand the statistics he / she is using, and are they relevant or sufficiently stringent enough to produce a reliable / repeatable result, we can have confidence in.
(Problems 3 and 4 listed above sound very similar, but in climate science in particular
there are great differences in the subtleties.)
In this particular instance I am asking is there a 3 and 4 problem/s listed above.
Would 10% absorption in a flask of a certain physical length, gas concentration, pressure, temperature, tell us what it is that is portrayed in the chart, to be telling us.
I distinctly think not, if indeed they are flask measurements.
The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed
(and hence clamorous to be led to safety)
by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.
H. L. Mencken.
The hobgoblins have to be imaginary so that
"they" can offer their solutions, not THE solutions.
|Messages In This Thread|
RE: Layman struggles with Science - Derek - 10-16-2010 11:20 PM
User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)