In reply to: Scott Alexander’s Learning To Love Scientific Consensus. Actually, I have planned (in my mind) a somewhat longer post on my take on the ‘correct contrarian cluster’, or how to make up your mind of what to believe on controversial topics. But I certainly don’t have time to write that now, so instead […]

This post is unusually blunt because the topic concerns some rather serious criticism leveled against me. This necessitates replying with some facts that I’ve used for self-assessment purposes. In case you missed it, my post the mental and behavioral problems of kids with parents from different races generated some furor. I replied to the first […]

Being annoyed by some of the usual qualitative drivel masquerading as science (see almost any tweet by @RealPeerReview), I was moved to make a nice background/poster. en.wikiquote.org/wiki/William_Thomson A slide from some anthropologist said of Galton that he “Worshipped at the alter of quantification”. That’s a nice way to put it!

This book is written by one of the persons behind Skeptical Science, a website debunking pseudoscience in the area of climatology and global warning, very much like Talk Origins debunks evolution related pseudoscience. The book itself has more of a meta style and does not cover all arguments put forward by climate contrarians. After all, […]

I had the impression that, since recognition of [problem] dates back at least to [person from a long time ago], there was a voluminous literature and [statistics to deal with the problem] was a solved problem, so I’m a little troubled that you seem to be trying to invent your own methods and aren’t citing […]

I had my first Twitter controversy. So: @StuartJRitchie @FrontiersIn is a predatory open access journal. Publication fee is 1600€ t.co/zxdCppVR0J t.co/BUCXliIXwG — Emil OW Kirkegaard (@KirkegaardEmil) September 27, 2014 @KirkegaardEmil @StuartJRitchie you do realize that you are paying ~5000 per article for 'normal' journals? Nothing predatory about it — rogier kievit (@rogierK) September 28, 2014 […]

Perhaps the easiest way to convince yourself is by scanning the literature of soft psychology over the last 30 years and noticing what happens to theories. Most of them suffer the fate that General MacArthur ascribed to old generals—They never die, they just slowly fade away. In the developed sciences, theories tend either to become […]

[Philip_E._Tetlock]_Expert_Political_Judgment_How(Bookos.org) Very interesting book! —- Game Theorists. The rivalry between Sherlock Holmes and the evil genius Professor Moriarty illustrates how indeterminacy can arise as a natural by-product of rational agents second-guessing each other. When the two first met, Moriarty was eager, too eager, to display his capacity for interactive thinking by announcing: “All I have […]

beyond the hoax – alan sokal Much of the material is the same as in Sokal and Bricmont’s earlier book. But there is some new material as well. I especially found the stuff on hindu nationalism and pseudoscience interesting, and the stuff on pseudoscience in nursing. Never heard of that before, but it wasnt totally […]