Climate of Complete Certainty

[whit3rd]

On Tuesday, February 11, 2020 at 10:05:09 AM UTC-8, John Larkin wrote:

> Unfortunately, in some so-called sciences, there is no proof.

Meaningless. Proof is a concept applicable in logic and mathematics.
In science, we can disprove, or test, or measure.

What in the world do you mean by 'so-called sciences' ?
Astrology, because it ends in '-ology'?

 

[John Larkin]

On Tue, 11 Feb 2020 11:35:14 -0800 (PST), whit3rd <whit3rd@gmail.com>
wrote:

On Tuesday, February 11, 2020 at 10:05:09 AM UTC-8, John Larkin wrote:

Unfortunately, in some so-called sciences, there is no proof.

Meaningless. Proof is a concept applicable in logic and mathematics.
In science, we can disprove, or test, or measure.

What in the world do you mean by 'so-called sciences' ?

Sociology. Psychology. Ethnic studies. Climatology.

--

John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc
picosecond timing precision measurement

jlarkin att highlandtechnology dott com
http://www.highlandtechnology.com

 

[John Larkin]

On Tue, 11 Feb 2020 15:12:14 -0500, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote:

On 2/10/20 10:04 PM, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Mon, 10 Feb 2020 16:05:19 -0800 (PST), dagmargoodboat@yahoo.com
wrote:

On Monday, February 10, 2020 at 4:27:55 PM UTC-5, John Larkin wrote:
On Mon, 10 Feb 2020 21:43:38 +0200, Dimiter_Popoff <dp@tgi-sci.com
wrote:

On 2/9/2020 1:47, Les Cargill wrote:
whit3rd wrote:
On Friday, February 7, 2020 at 2:34:27 PM UTC-8, John Larkin wrote:

Americans buy the products that work, whether Scientists were
involved or not. Often, they weren't.

Somehow, Americans bought President Trump.   It's not working.

Works for me.



Not just "somehow" - the guy's a master manipulator. He went "Boo!"
at the Republican Party and by the time they changed their pants, he was
the nominee. "Insane Clown President" covers this....

This was a master stroke, really.

Yes. But I think he clearly does not possess half the brains it takes
to mastermind what happened.

Hillary's team had a mountain of brains, and money, and lost.


Who is the real puppeteer can only be speculated in a conspiracy
theory mode of course (I do not think it was the Russians though
they did some of the work, nor do I think it was anyone US based...),
we are unlikely to know the truth in our lifetimes.
I don't think Trump knows that himself either.

He has common sense, a will to win, and luck.

Super smart people I admire have met with Trump privately.
They were blown away. They say the man's brilliant.

I'm amazed at the level of his opposition's ignorance. PBS'
Newshour's Mark Shields and David Gergen, for example.

Good grief, force yourself to read the Sunday New York Times. It's all
Trump, Race, Trump, Global Warming, Trump, and Trump.


Easing obnoxious regs and lowering the marginal corporate tax
rate have re-ignited half the country (or more).

Cheers,
James Arthur

The small biz tax cuts will pay off bigly, but slowly.

If the stock market tanks before November, DT can blame the
coronavirus. Again, he's lucky.



Wow, not only does he like being lied to but he'll even help craft the
lies he is to be told! A true fan.

I'm not a fan of anyone. But it is interesting to have a President who
was never a lawyer, never held office before, and got rich *before* he
was an elected official.

--

John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc
picosecond timing precision measurement

jlarkin att highlandtechnology dott com
http://www.highlandtechnology.com

 

[Tom Gardner]

On 11/02/20 18:05, John Larkin wrote:

On Tue, 11 Feb 2020 08:31:16 +0000, Martin Brown
'''newspam'''@nezumi.demon.co.uk> wrote:

On 10/02/2020 17:26, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Mon, 10 Feb 2020 07:17:51 -0800 (PST), George Herold
ggherold@gmail.com> wrote:

Oh I didn't read the NY times article. There is much that is kinda 'broken'
in science that many on the left don't want to see.
Take peer-review as one problem. Peer review can operate as a gate keeper
for ideas, and not to get the 'best' science published.
GH


Exactly. In some areas of study, having an unorthodox idea can be
career-ending. Peer review is one enforcement mechanism to suppress
genuinely new ideas. Of course, the more a science is subject to
experimental verification, the more tolerant it is of radical ideas.

Only if it is an unorthodox view that conflicts with one of the
conservation laws, flat Earth, alien abduction or psychic powers.

Extraordinary claims require *EXTRAORDINARY* proof.

Even then the odd senior physics researcher has survived being conned by
the likes of Uri Geller without too much damage to their conventional
research career. The amazing Randi designed experiments that were much
less inclined to to succumb to his "psychic powers" than those designed
by physicists. Physics is not used to experimental subjects that cheat.

Unfortunately, in some so-called sciences, there is no proof.

In that case it isn't a science.

To a useful approximation science is:
1) observe
2) formulate hypothesis to explain observations
3) formulate tests that can falsify the hypothesis
4) if it passes the tests repeatedly, the hypothesis
becomes a theory

The world becomes greyer when tests cannot be rerun
or when the hypothesis makes statistical predictions.

But grey != black, extraordinary claims still
require extraordinary proof, and imperfect science is
still better than emotion.

 

[Tom Gardner]

On 11/02/20 20:12, John Larkin wrote:

On Tue, 11 Feb 2020 11:35:14 -0800 (PST), whit3rd <whit3rd@gmail.com
wrote:

On Tuesday, February 11, 2020 at 10:05:09 AM UTC-8, John Larkin wrote:

Unfortunately, in some so-called sciences, there is no proof.

Meaningless. Proof is a concept applicable in logic and mathematics.
In science, we can disprove, or test, or measure.

What in the world do you mean by 'so-called sciences' ?

Sociology. Psychology. Ethnic studies. Climatology.

Ethnic studies "can't" be a science since there is
little if any prediction + falsifiable test.

The others /can/ be science, but there is a large
statistical component, and many confounding factors
to be taken into account.

Those that don't understand statistics will find
that unpalatable.

 

[bitrex]

On 2/10/20 10:04 PM, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

On Mon, 10 Feb 2020 16:05:19 -0800 (PST), dagmargoodboat@yahoo.com
wrote:

On Monday, February 10, 2020 at 4:27:55 PM UTC-5, John Larkin wrote:
On Mon, 10 Feb 2020 21:43:38 +0200, Dimiter_Popoff <dp@tgi-sci.com
wrote:

On 2/9/2020 1:47, Les Cargill wrote:
whit3rd wrote:
On Friday, February 7, 2020 at 2:34:27 PM UTC-8, John Larkin wrote:

Americans buy the products that work, whether Scientists were
involved or not. Often, they weren't.

Somehow, Americans bought President Trump.   It's not working.

Works for me.



Not just "somehow" - the guy's a master manipulator. He went "Boo!"
at the Republican Party and by the time they changed their pants, he was
the nominee. "Insane Clown President" covers this....

This was a master stroke, really.

Yes. But I think he clearly does not possess half the brains it takes
to mastermind what happened.

Hillary's team had a mountain of brains, and money, and lost.


Who is the real puppeteer can only be speculated in a conspiracy
theory mode of course (I do not think it was the Russians though
they did some of the work, nor do I think it was anyone US based...),
we are unlikely to know the truth in our lifetimes.
I don't think Trump knows that himself either.

He has common sense, a will to win, and luck.

Super smart people I admire have met with Trump privately.
They were blown away. They say the man's brilliant.

I'm amazed at the level of his opposition's ignorance. PBS'
Newshour's Mark Shields and David Gergen, for example.

Good grief, force yourself to read the Sunday New York Times. It's all
Trump, Race, Trump, Global Warming, Trump, and Trump.


Easing obnoxious regs and lowering the marginal corporate tax
rate have re-ignited half the country (or more).

Cheers,
James Arthur

The small biz tax cuts will pay off bigly, but slowly.

If the stock market tanks before November, DT can blame the
coronavirus. Again, he's lucky.

Wow, not only does he like being lied to but he'll even help craft the
lies he is to be told! A true fan.

 

[bitrex]

On 2/11/20 3:41 PM, John Larkin wrote:

On Tue, 11 Feb 2020 15:12:14 -0500, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote:

On 2/10/20 10:04 PM, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Mon, 10 Feb 2020 16:05:19 -0800 (PST), dagmargoodboat@yahoo.com
wrote:

On Monday, February 10, 2020 at 4:27:55 PM UTC-5, John Larkin wrote:
On Mon, 10 Feb 2020 21:43:38 +0200, Dimiter_Popoff <dp@tgi-sci.com
wrote:

On 2/9/2020 1:47, Les Cargill wrote:
whit3rd wrote:
On Friday, February 7, 2020 at 2:34:27 PM UTC-8, John Larkin wrote:

Americans buy the products that work, whether Scientists were
involved or not. Often, they weren't.

Somehow, Americans bought President Trump.   It's not working.

Works for me.



Not just "somehow" - the guy's a master manipulator. He went "Boo!"
at the Republican Party and by the time they changed their pants, he was
the nominee. "Insane Clown President" covers this....

This was a master stroke, really.

Yes. But I think he clearly does not possess half the brains it takes
to mastermind what happened.

Hillary's team had a mountain of brains, and money, and lost.


Who is the real puppeteer can only be speculated in a conspiracy
theory mode of course (I do not think it was the Russians though
they did some of the work, nor do I think it was anyone US based...),
we are unlikely to know the truth in our lifetimes.
I don't think Trump knows that himself either.

He has common sense, a will to win, and luck.

Super smart people I admire have met with Trump privately.
They were blown away. They say the man's brilliant.

I'm amazed at the level of his opposition's ignorance. PBS'
Newshour's Mark Shields and David Gergen, for example.

Good grief, force yourself to read the Sunday New York Times. It's all
Trump, Race, Trump, Global Warming, Trump, and Trump.


Easing obnoxious regs and lowering the marginal corporate tax
rate have re-ignited half the country (or more).

Cheers,
James Arthur

The small biz tax cuts will pay off bigly, but slowly.

If the stock market tanks before November, DT can blame the
coronavirus. Again, he's lucky.



Wow, not only does he like being lied to but he'll even help craft the
lies he is to be told! A true fan.

I'm not a fan of anyone. But it is interesting to have a President who
was never a lawyer, never held office before, and got rich *before* he
was an elected official.

You mean Dwight Eisenhower? He's no Dwight Eisenhower that's for sure.

 

[John Robertson]

On 2020/02/11 12:41 p.m., John Larkin wrote:

On Tue, 11 Feb 2020 15:12:14 -0500, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote:

On 2/10/20 10:04 PM, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Mon, 10 Feb 2020 16:05:19 -0800 (PST), dagmargoodboat@yahoo.com
wrote:

On Monday, February 10, 2020 at 4:27:55 PM UTC-5, John Larkin wrote:
On Mon, 10 Feb 2020 21:43:38 +0200, Dimiter_Popoff <dp@tgi-sci.com
wrote:

On 2/9/2020 1:47, Les Cargill wrote:
whit3rd wrote:
On Friday, February 7, 2020 at 2:34:27 PM UTC-8, John Larkin wrote:

Americans buy the products that work, whether Scientists were
involved or not. Often, they weren't.

Somehow, Americans bought President Trump.   It's not working.

Works for me.



Not just "somehow" - the guy's a master manipulator. He went "Boo!"
at the Republican Party and by the time they changed their pants, he was
the nominee. "Insane Clown President" covers this....

This was a master stroke, really.

Yes. But I think he clearly does not possess half the brains it takes
to mastermind what happened.

Hillary's team had a mountain of brains, and money, and lost.


Who is the real puppeteer can only be speculated in a conspiracy
theory mode of course (I do not think it was the Russians though
they did some of the work, nor do I think it was anyone US based...),
we are unlikely to know the truth in our lifetimes.
I don't think Trump knows that himself either.

He has common sense, a will to win, and luck.

Super smart people I admire have met with Trump privately.
They were blown away. They say the man's brilliant.

I'm amazed at the level of his opposition's ignorance. PBS'
Newshour's Mark Shields and David Gergen, for example.

Good grief, force yourself to read the Sunday New York Times. It's all
Trump, Race, Trump, Global Warming, Trump, and Trump.


Easing obnoxious regs and lowering the marginal corporate tax
rate have re-ignited half the country (or more).

Cheers,
James Arthur

The small biz tax cuts will pay off bigly, but slowly.

If the stock market tanks before November, DT can blame the
coronavirus. Again, he's lucky.



Wow, not only does he like being lied to but he'll even help craft the
lies he is to be told! A true fan.

I'm not a fan of anyone. But it is interesting to have a President who
was never a lawyer, never held office before, and got rich *before* he
was an elected official.

He got rich because his daddy both financed and then would bail him out.
It is not like Dwight who started from scratch!

DJT is just another shyster. Blue Suede Shoe salesman...

I don't see how having a liar and a cheat in charge of a country is
going to do any good for the general population. Unlike China and
Russia, democracies usually have protections in place to avoid this sort
of fiasco.

As for the source of personal wealth of various presidents:

https://247wallst.com/banking-finance/2010/05/17/the-net-worth-of-the-american-presidents-washington-to-obama/5/

The last sentence of Obama's section is telling :"While he admitted he
would save money if he refinanced his mortgage, he said, “when you’re
president you have to be a little careful about these transactions.”

John

 

[bitrex]

On 2/11/20 5:40 PM, John Robertson wrote:

On 2020/02/11 12:41 p.m., John Larkin wrote:
On Tue, 11 Feb 2020 15:12:14 -0500, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote:

On 2/10/20 10:04 PM, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Mon, 10 Feb 2020 16:05:19 -0800 (PST), dagmargoodboat@yahoo.com
wrote:

On Monday, February 10, 2020 at 4:27:55 PM UTC-5, John Larkin wrote:
On Mon, 10 Feb 2020 21:43:38 +0200, Dimiter_Popoff <dp@tgi-sci.com
wrote:

On 2/9/2020 1:47, Les Cargill wrote:
whit3rd wrote:
On Friday, February 7, 2020 at 2:34:27 PM UTC-8, John Larkin
wrote:

Americans buy the products that work, whether Scientists were
involved or not. Often, they weren't.

Somehow, Americans bought President Trump.   It's not working.

Works for me.



Not just "somehow" - the guy's a master manipulator. He went "Boo!"
at the Republican Party and by the time they changed their
pants, he was
the nominee. "Insane Clown President" covers this....

This was a master stroke, really.

Yes. But I think he clearly does not possess half the brains it
takes
to mastermind what happened.

Hillary's team had a mountain of brains, and money, and lost.


Who is the real puppeteer can only be speculated in a conspiracy
theory mode of course (I do not think it was the Russians though
they did some of the work, nor do I think it was anyone US
based...),
we are unlikely to know the truth in our lifetimes.
I don't think Trump knows that himself either.

He has common sense, a will to win, and luck.

Super smart people I admire have met with Trump privately.
They were blown away. They say the man's brilliant.

I'm amazed at the level of his opposition's ignorance. PBS'
Newshour's Mark Shields and David Gergen, for example.

Good grief, force yourself to read the Sunday New York Times. It's all
Trump, Race, Trump, Global Warming, Trump, and Trump.


Easing obnoxious regs and lowering the marginal corporate tax
rate have re-ignited half the country (or more).

Cheers,
James Arthur

The small biz tax cuts will pay off bigly, but slowly.

If the stock market tanks before November, DT can blame the
coronavirus. Again, he's lucky.



Wow, not only does he like being lied to but he'll even help craft the
lies he is to be told! A true fan.

I'm not a fan of anyone. But it is interesting to have a President who
was never a lawyer, never held office before, and got rich *before* he
was an elected official.


He got rich because his daddy both financed and then would bail him out.
It is not like Dwight who started from scratch!

DJT is just another shyster. Blue Suede Shoe salesman...

The most recent Presidents I can think of that were somewhat legitimate
"self-made-men" that were born into at best lower-middle class families
were LBJ and Ronald Reagan.

I don't see how having a liar and a cheat in charge of a country is
going to do any good for the general population. Unlike China and
Russia, democracies usually have protections in place to avoid this sort
of fiasco.

As for the source of personal wealth of various presidents:

https://247wallst.com/banking-finance/2010/05/17/the-net-worth-of-the-american-presidents-washington-to-obama/5/


The last sentence of Obama's section is telling :"While he admitted he
would save money if he refinanced his mortgage, he said, “when you’re
president you have to be a little careful about these transactions.”

John

 

[bitrex]

On 2/11/20 5:40 PM, John Robertson wrote:

Wow, not only does he like being lied to but he'll even help craft the
lies he is to be told! A true fan.

I'm not a fan of anyone. But it is interesting to have a President who
was never a lawyer, never held office before, and got rich *before* he
was an elected official.


He got rich because his daddy both financed and then would bail him out.
It is not like Dwight who started from scratch!

DJT is just another shyster. Blue Suede Shoe salesman...

I get the impression DJT was never very naturally good with women or did
very well without a billion dollar bankroll behind his propositions.

Therefore I suspect he was never particular good at "sales." Show me a
man who can walk into a downtown bar on a Saturday night in T-shirt and
jeans with ten dollars in his pocket and walk out with a lovely young
lass on his arm four hours later and I'll show you a salesman.

 

[whit3rd]

On Tuesday, February 11, 2020 at 2:58:48 PM UTC-8, bitrex wrote:

The most recent Presidents I can think of that were somewhat legitimate
"self-made-men" that were born into at best lower-middle class families
were LBJ and Ronald Reagan.

Why not Barak Obama?

 

[whit3rd]

On Tuesday, February 11, 2020 at 12:12:11 PM UTC-8, John Larkin wrote:

On Tue, 11 Feb 2020 11:35:14 -0800 (PST), whit3rd <whit3rd@gmail.com
wrote:

On Tuesday, February 11, 2020 at 10:05:09 AM UTC-8, John Larkin wrote:

Unfortunately, in some so-called sciences, there is no proof.

Meaningless. Proof is a concept applicable in logic and mathematics.
In science, we can disprove, or test, or measure.

What in the world do you mean by 'so-called sciences' ?

Sociology. Psychology. Ethnic studies. Climatology.

But, climatology DOES have predictive value. Your 'no-proof' criterion
still doesn't make much sense (can you prove your assertion
of 'unfortunate'? How?) So, the onus is on you to prove that in sociology, 'there is no proof',
then go on to at least one other item in your list.

Heck, the moment a world atmosphere model spontaneously developed Hadley cells, climatology
had a proof (of the non-mathematical 'evidence shows' type).

 

[Bill Sloman]

On Wednesday, February 12, 2020 at 3:34:16 AM UTC+11, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

On Tue, 11 Feb 2020 11:16:29 -0500, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote:

On 2/10/20 7:05 PM, dagmargoodboat@yahoo.com wrote:

Who is the real puppeteer can only be speculated in a conspiracy
theory mode of course (I do not think it was the Russians though
they did some of the work, nor do I think it was anyone US based...),
we are unlikely to know the truth in our lifetimes.
I don't think Trump knows that himself either.

He has common sense, a will to win, and luck.

Super smart people I admire have met with Trump privately.
They were blown away. They say the man's brilliant.

I'm amazed at the level of his opposition's ignorance. PBS'
Newshour's Mark Shields and David Gergen, for example.

Easing obnoxious regs and lowering the marginal corporate tax
rate have re-ignited half the country (or more).

Cheers,
James Arthur


Imagine being so ignorant of the potential geopolitical/military
consequences of assassinating Soleimani that no theater missile defense
systems were moved into position around the targets in Iraq that Iran
would be most likely to target in a retaliatory strike.

A retaliation in that fashion was entirely predictable and Iranian
missiles being shot out of the sky making a massive PR-lose for the
Iranians would have been entirely predictable to the Iranians as well,
making their decision to launch a lot more difficult at the very least.

Instead US forces had no option but to watch as the missiles fell on
their heads and it was mostly by good fortune that nobody was killed,
though many were injured and Trump has tried to down-play the injuries.

Yep, total unawareness of cause-and-effect can appear like wisdom for a
while. Must be a great feeling to see that while our Saudi Arabian
friends get a missile defense system the US-based Iraqi forces got
_nothing_.

I'm sure there will be someone who will argue what a "grand strategist"
he is, allowing US troops to have missiles fall on them with no
fore-thought and no means of defense.

Yeah, the idiot only saved a few thousand, or a few hundred thousands,
of lives. And changed the course of Persian history.

I wonder why John Larkin might think that. The strongest argument against assassination is that assassinated leaders get replaced by leaders who have more pronounced examples of the same features.

It's unlikely that assassinating Soleimani saved any lives at all, and even less likely that it will "change the course of Persian history" in any way that might serve the USA. Soleimani had been in the job for some years, and his successors seem likely to persist in doing what he did.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[John Larkin]

On Tue, 11 Feb 2020 14:40:39 -0800, John Robertson <spam@flippers.com>
wrote:

On 2020/02/11 12:41 p.m., John Larkin wrote:
On Tue, 11 Feb 2020 15:12:14 -0500, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote:

On 2/10/20 10:04 PM, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Mon, 10 Feb 2020 16:05:19 -0800 (PST), dagmargoodboat@yahoo.com
wrote:

On Monday, February 10, 2020 at 4:27:55 PM UTC-5, John Larkin wrote:
On Mon, 10 Feb 2020 21:43:38 +0200, Dimiter_Popoff <dp@tgi-sci.com
wrote:

On 2/9/2020 1:47, Les Cargill wrote:
whit3rd wrote:
On Friday, February 7, 2020 at 2:34:27 PM UTC-8, John Larkin wrote:

Americans buy the products that work, whether Scientists were
involved or not. Often, they weren't.

Somehow, Americans bought President Trump.   It's not working.

Works for me.



Not just "somehow" - the guy's a master manipulator. He went "Boo!"
at the Republican Party and by the time they changed their pants, he was
the nominee. "Insane Clown President" covers this....

This was a master stroke, really.

Yes. But I think he clearly does not possess half the brains it takes
to mastermind what happened.

Hillary's team had a mountain of brains, and money, and lost.


Who is the real puppeteer can only be speculated in a conspiracy
theory mode of course (I do not think it was the Russians though
they did some of the work, nor do I think it was anyone US based...),
we are unlikely to know the truth in our lifetimes.
I don't think Trump knows that himself either.

He has common sense, a will to win, and luck.

Super smart people I admire have met with Trump privately.
They were blown away. They say the man's brilliant.

I'm amazed at the level of his opposition's ignorance. PBS'
Newshour's Mark Shields and David Gergen, for example.

Good grief, force yourself to read the Sunday New York Times. It's all
Trump, Race, Trump, Global Warming, Trump, and Trump.


Easing obnoxious regs and lowering the marginal corporate tax
rate have re-ignited half the country (or more).

Cheers,
James Arthur

The small biz tax cuts will pay off bigly, but slowly.

If the stock market tanks before November, DT can blame the
coronavirus. Again, he's lucky.



Wow, not only does he like being lied to but he'll even help craft the
lies he is to be told! A true fan.

I'm not a fan of anyone. But it is interesting to have a President who
was never a lawyer, never held office before, and got rich *before* he
was an elected official.


He got rich because his daddy both financed and then would bail him out.
It is not like Dwight who started from scratch!

DJT is just another shyster. Blue Suede Shoe salesman...

I don't see how having a liar and a cheat in charge of a country is
going to do any good for the general population. Unlike China and
Russia, democracies usually have protections in place to avoid this sort
of fiasco.

Fiasco? All you are doing is calling names at a legally elected
President.

--

John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc
picosecond timing precision measurement

jlarkin att highlandtechnology dott com
http://www.highlandtechnology.com

 

[Bill Sloman]

On Wednesday, February 12, 2020 at 5:05:09 AM UTC+11, John Larkin wrote:

On Tue, 11 Feb 2020 08:31:16 +0000, Martin Brown
'''newspam'''@nezumi.demon.co.uk> wrote:

On 10/02/2020 17:26, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Mon, 10 Feb 2020 07:17:51 -0800 (PST), George Herold
ggherold@gmail.com> wrote:

Oh I didn't read the NY times article. There is much that is kinda 'broken'
in science that many on the left don't want to see.
Take peer-review as one problem. Peer review can operate as a gate keeper
for ideas, and not to get the 'best' science published.
GH


Exactly. In some areas of study, having an unorthodox idea can be
career-ending. Peer review is one enforcement mechanism to suppress
genuinely new ideas. Of course, the more a science is subject to
experimental verification, the more tolerant it is of radical ideas.

Only if it is an unorthodox view that conflicts with one of the
conservation laws, flat Earth, alien abduction or psychic powers.

Extraordinary claims require *EXTRAORDINARY* proof.

Even then the odd senior physics researcher has survived being conned by
the likes of Uri Geller without too much damage to their conventional
research career. The amazing Randi designed experiments that were much
less inclined to to succumb to his "psychic powers" than those designed
by physicists. Physics is not used to experimental subjects that cheat.

Unfortunately, in some so-called sciences, there is no proof.

None that John Larkin can understand. He's got a blind spot when it comes to observational sciences, and presumably doesn't think much of Charles Darwin, or Edwin Hubble.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Bill Sloman]

On Wednesday, February 12, 2020 at 7:41:20 AM UTC+11, John Larkin wrote:

On Tue, 11 Feb 2020 15:12:14 -0500, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote:

On 2/10/20 10:04 PM, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Mon, 10 Feb 2020 16:05:19 -0800 (PST), dagmargoodboat@yahoo.com
wrote:

On Monday, February 10, 2020 at 4:27:55 PM UTC-5, John Larkin wrote:
On Mon, 10 Feb 2020 21:43:38 +0200, Dimiter_Popoff <dp@tgi-sci.com
wrote:

On 2/9/2020 1:47, Les Cargill wrote:
whit3rd wrote:
On Friday, February 7, 2020 at 2:34:27 PM UTC-8, John Larkin wrote:

Americans buy the products that work, whether Scientists were
involved or not. Often, they weren't.

Somehow, Americans bought President Trump.   It's not working.

Works for me.



Not just "somehow" - the guy's a master manipulator. He went "Boo!"
at the Republican Party and by the time they changed their pants, he was
the nominee. "Insane Clown President" covers this....

This was a master stroke, really.

Yes. But I think he clearly does not possess half the brains it takes
to mastermind what happened.

Hillary's team had a mountain of brains, and money, and lost.


Who is the real puppeteer can only be speculated in a conspiracy
theory mode of course (I do not think it was the Russians though
they did some of the work, nor do I think it was anyone US based...),
we are unlikely to know the truth in our lifetimes.
I don't think Trump knows that himself either.

He has common sense, a will to win, and luck.

Super smart people I admire have met with Trump privately.
They were blown away. They say the man's brilliant.

I'm amazed at the level of his opposition's ignorance. PBS'
Newshour's Mark Shields and David Gergen, for example.

Good grief, force yourself to read the Sunday New York Times. It's all
Trump, Race, Trump, Global Warming, Trump, and Trump.


Easing obnoxious regs and lowering the marginal corporate tax
rate have re-ignited half the country (or more).

Cheers,
James Arthur

The small biz tax cuts will pay off bigly, but slowly.

If the stock market tanks before November, DT can blame the
coronavirus. Again, he's lucky.



Wow, not only does he like being lied to but he'll even help craft the
lies he is to be told! A true fan.

I'm not a fan of anyone. But it is interesting to have a President who
was never a lawyer, never held office before, and got rich *before* he
was an elected official.

There's a Chinese curse "May you live in interesting times."

Trump has made life much too "interesting" for comfort. John Larkin doesn't know enough to notice the down-side of being lead by somebody who is almost as ignorant as he is, and equally unwilling to get his head around an understanding any model of the world that is complicate enough to be useful.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[John Larkin]

On Tue, 11 Feb 2020 18:06:23 -0500, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote:

On 2/11/20 5:40 PM, John Robertson wrote:

Wow, not only does he like being lied to but he'll even help craft the
lies he is to be told! A true fan.

I'm not a fan of anyone. But it is interesting to have a President who
was never a lawyer, never held office before, and got rich *before* he
was an elected official.


He got rich because his daddy both financed and then would bail him out.
It is not like Dwight who started from scratch!

DJT is just another shyster. Blue Suede Shoe salesman...

I get the impression DJT was never very naturally good with women or did
very well without a billion dollar bankroll behind his propositions.

Therefore I suspect he was never particular good at "sales." Show me a
man who can walk into a downtown bar on a Saturday night in T-shirt and
jeans with ten dollars in his pocket and walk out with a lovely young
lass on his arm four hours later and I'll show you a salesman.

Is that what you want in a President?

--

John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc
picosecond timing precision measurement

jlarkin att highlandtechnology dott com
http://www.highlandtechnology.com

 

[Bill Sloman]

On Wednesday, February 12, 2020 at 4:24:39 AM UTC+11, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

On Tue, 11 Feb 2020 18:49:59 +0200, Dimiter_Popoff <dp@tgi-sci.com
wrote:

On 2/11/2020 18:36, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Tue, 11 Feb 2020 18:14:10 +0200, Dimiter_Popoff <dp@tgi-sci.com
wrote:

On 2/11/2020 5:09, Les Cargill wrote:
 Dimiter_Popoff wrote:
On 2/9/2020 1:47, Les Cargill wrote:
whit3rd wrote:
On Friday, February 7, 2020 at 2:34:27 PM UTC-8, John Larkin wrote:

Americans buy the products that work, whether Scientists were
involved or not. Often, they weren't.

Somehow, Americans bought President Trump.   It's not working.


Not just "somehow" - the guy's a master manipulator. He went "Boo!"
at the Republican Party and by the time they changed their pants, he was
the nominee. "Insane Clown President" covers this....

This was a master stroke, really.

Yes. But I think he clearly does not possess half the brains it takes
to mastermind what happened.

I think that's mostly undecidable. Nothing in his communication style
is designed to expose actual information. It's more like sleight-of-hand.

Perhaps you'd have had to see this in real life for it to make sense?
It's schematically described in David Mamet's "Glengarry Glen Ross", in
an intentionally obscure manner.

I've worked for a couple guys like that.

I am far from being close to his output as you are, just what hits
me through the media (mainly the BBC). So my perception may be wrong.
But I can see what you mean and I think this is what I have seen
in my more limited evaluation of him, too.


Who is the real puppeteer can only be speculated in a conspiracy
theory mode of course (I do not think it was the Russians though
they did some of the work, nor do I think it was anyone US based...),
we are unlikely to know the truth in our lifetimes.
I don't think Trump knows that himself either.


There is no puppeteer.

Not in the literal sense of course, nobody is - or could - be
micromanaging him.
Whether there is one or not can only be speculated of course; what
I think is that someone with long term (as opposed to mandated)
power has been helpful putting him there, probably having something
on him. Not unlike anybody else.... I expect this would be
the modus operandi of those who retain some level of control to
former colonies etc. Enforcing a couple of crucial decisions per
mandate would be plenty - and not necessarily bad for society.
But this is not even a conspiracy theory, just a hypothesis which
cannot be proven wrong - and it may well be that.

There is another, even worse conspiracy theory. Millions of flyover
state voters elected him because he's on their side.

This might be even a worse one. With todays media influence they'd elect
even a chimp telling them he is on their side.

95% of the US media was on Hillary's side. And the deplorable
uneducated flyover yokels noticed.

Over the country as a whole, three million more voters chose Hillary than Trump.

In the three flyover states that turned out to be crucial, that Russians had put in alot of effort of social media to support Triimp and he got about 80,000 more votes than she did in the three states where it actually mattered.

Trump won by a very thin margin, with Russian help.

The Founders knew that the coastal urban consumers who made the laws
and owned the banks would out-vote and exploit the country hicks who
sent them their food and fuel and fabrics and liquor. So they built
nonlinearities into the system. Pretty smart dudes.

What they actually did was offer a couple of bribes to the smaller states. The senate's over-representation of the smaller states does serve a useful purpose, which is why the idea was around for the founding tax evaders to copy.

The electoral college was a terrible idea - you've only got one president and he (or she) has to represent that whole country - and nobody has been silly enough to copy it.

Alexander Hamilton touted the electoral college as a device to keep people like Trump out of the job. It didn't work, which doesn't make him a very smart dude.

James Arthur seems to idolise the founders, but the two smartest people who might have contributed to the creation of the constitution - Benjamin Franklin and Thomas Paine - weren't rich merchants and didn't own lots of land - so they weren't involved.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[bitrex]

On 2/11/20 6:22 PM, whit3rd wrote:

On Tuesday, February 11, 2020 at 2:58:48 PM UTC-8, bitrex wrote:

The most recent Presidents I can think of that were somewhat legitimate
"self-made-men" that were born into at best lower-middle class families
were LBJ and Ronald Reagan.

Why not Barak Obama?

Obama's biological father was a Harvard grad and government functionary
in Kenya, Obama attended private prep schools for most of his life
before college, his step-father and his mother had advanced degrees also
and AFAIK while his home life may have been "strained" they weren't poor
and didn't struggle to put food on the table.

That is to say he experienced prejudice because of race sometimes
surely, but he was definitely not raised in a one-farmhouse with five
siblings, or in the 'hood like some black men I've known who've over
their lives received a huge helping of both racism _and_ class-ism.

So depends on what your bar for "self-made man" is; the (few) actual
rags-to-riches stories I'm familiar with don't involve the terms PhD or
Harvard with respect to anyone involved