Comments on: Mind Boggling Stupidity http://www.theangrydrunk.com/2008/06/26/mind-boggling-stupidity/ Delivering Enlightenment to the Masses, One Blunt Force Trauma at a Time. Tue, 07 Feb 2012 15:33:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Rob http://www.theangrydrunk.com/2008/06/26/mind-boggling-stupidity/comment-page-1/#comment-411 Rob Thu, 26 Jun 2008 21:24:57 +0000 http://www.theangrydrunk.com/?p=231#comment-411 <p>The most egregious flaw in Anderson’s argument is that the Google database is horribly biased (in the statistical sense of the word). Extremists tend to dominate while mainline opinions are tacit.</p> <p>F’instance, if I trust Google, there is a 25% chance that the moon landing was fake: 2,730,000 believe it was real, 880,000 do not.</p> <p>Science is not a democracy.</p> The most egregious flaw in Anderson’s argument is that the Google database is horribly biased (in the statistical sense of the word). Extremists tend to dominate while mainline opinions are tacit.

F’instance, if I trust Google, there is a 25% chance that the moon landing was fake: 2,730,000 believe it was real, 880,000 do not.

Science is not a democracy.

]]> By: Rob http://www.theangrydrunk.com/2008/06/26/mind-boggling-stupidity/comment-page-1/#comment-3476 Rob Thu, 26 Jun 2008 21:24:00 +0000 http://www.theangrydrunk.com/?p=231#comment-3476 <p>The most egregious flaw in Anderson’s argument is that the Google database is horribly biased (in the statistical sense of the word). Extremists tend to dominate while mainline opinions are tacit.</p> <p>F’instance, if I trust Google, there is a 25% chance that the moon landing was fake: 2,730,000 believe it was real, 880,000 do not.</p> <p>Science is not a democracy.</p> The most egregious flaw in Anderson’s argument is that the Google database is horribly biased (in the statistical sense of the word). Extremists tend to dominate while mainline opinions are tacit.

F’instance, if I trust Google, there is a 25% chance that the moon landing was fake: 2,730,000 believe it was real, 880,000 do not.

Science is not a democracy.

]]> By: The Angry Drunk http://www.theangrydrunk.com/2008/06/26/mind-boggling-stupidity/comment-page-1/#comment-410 The Angry Drunk Thu, 26 Jun 2008 18:56:34 +0000 http://www.theangrydrunk.com/?p=231#comment-410 <p>@<a href="#comment-409">Sigivald</a>: You're probably right. I was thinking of the "economist" pundits who usually work for think-tanks and who try to justify everything in terms of "the market." In retrospect they probably have as much understanding of economics as Chris Anderson has of science.</p> @Sigivald: You’re probably right. I was thinking of the “economist” pundits who usually work for think-tanks and who try to justify everything in terms of “the market.” In retrospect they probably have as much understanding of economics as Chris Anderson has of science.

]]> By: The Angry Drunk http://www.theangrydrunk.com/2008/06/26/mind-boggling-stupidity/comment-page-1/#comment-3475 The Angry Drunk Thu, 26 Jun 2008 18:56:00 +0000 http://www.theangrydrunk.com/?p=231#comment-3475 <p>@<a href="#comment-409" rel="nofollow">Sigivald</a>: You're probably right. I was thinking of the "economist" pundits who usually work for think-tanks and who try to justify everything in terms of "the market." In retrospect they probably have as much understanding of economics as Chris Anderson has of science.</p> @Sigivald: You’re probably right. I was thinking of the “economist” pundits who usually work for think-tanks and who try to justify everything in terms of “the market.” In retrospect they probably have as much understanding of economics as Chris Anderson has of science.

]]> By: Sigivald http://www.theangrydrunk.com/2008/06/26/mind-boggling-stupidity/comment-page-1/#comment-409 Sigivald Thu, 26 Jun 2008 17:38:04 +0000 http://www.theangrydrunk.com/?p=231#comment-409 <p>In fairness to economists, I don't think I've ever seen one claim that market forces <i>were</i> anything like or related to science.</p> <p>(Except - perhaps - in that markets exist, and have behaviours, and science could therefore be done <i>about</i> markets, and used to model them.</p> <p>Or, more aptly, "I will do science to it!")</p> <p>(Also, gunpowder.)</p> In fairness to economists, I don’t think I’ve ever seen one claim that market forces were anything like or related to science.

(Except — perhaps — in that markets exist, and have behaviours, and science could therefore be done about markets, and used to model them.

Or, more aptly, “I will do science to it!”)

(Also, gunpowder.)

]]> By: Sigivald http://www.theangrydrunk.com/2008/06/26/mind-boggling-stupidity/comment-page-1/#comment-3474 Sigivald Thu, 26 Jun 2008 17:38:00 +0000 http://www.theangrydrunk.com/?p=231#comment-3474 <p>In fairness to economists, I don't think I've ever seen one claim that market forces <i>were</i> anything like or related to science.</p> <p>(Except - perhaps - in that markets exist, and have behaviours, and science could therefore be done <i>about</i> markets, and used to model them.</p> <p>Or, more aptly, "I will do science to it!")</p> <p>(Also, gunpowder.)</p> In fairness to economists, I don’t think I’ve ever seen one claim that market forces were anything like or related to science.

(Except — perhaps — in that markets exist, and have behaviours, and science could therefore be done about markets, and used to model them.

Or, more aptly, “I will do science to it!”)

(Also, gunpowder.)

]]> By: sng http://www.theangrydrunk.com/2008/06/26/mind-boggling-stupidity/comment-page-1/#comment-408 sng Thu, 26 Jun 2008 16:34:31 +0000 http://www.theangrydrunk.com/?p=231#comment-408 <p>Brilliant. Just plain fucking brilliant.</p> Brilliant. Just plain fucking brilliant.

]]> By: sng http://www.theangrydrunk.com/2008/06/26/mind-boggling-stupidity/comment-page-1/#comment-3473 sng Thu, 26 Jun 2008 16:34:00 +0000 http://www.theangrydrunk.com/?p=231#comment-3473 <p>Brilliant. Just plain fucking brilliant.</p> Brilliant. Just plain fucking brilliant.

]]>