Curt Doolittle

Category: Science, Physics, and Philosophy of Science

  • If An Alien Race Launches A Nuclear Missile Towards Earth, Could Nasa Defend Our Planet?

    The mass necessary to fuel the transport a nuclear weapon across light years of space is so large that there would have to be some reason to do such a thing in the first place.  I mean, if you can move something that far, you don’t need to use a nuclear weapon, just move a rock a little bit so that it hits us. That’s much more logical.

    And these things tactics don’t make sense either. THere isn’t any reason to use nuclear weapons. Planets like ours appear to be pretty scarce, so they’re valuable. You wouldn’t want to damage it.

    I can’t imagine wanting to trade with aliens.  I think it’s more likely that we would be pets. You don’t nuke pets. You catch and breed them.

    https://www.quora.com/If-an-alien-race-launches-a-nuclear-missile-towards-Earth-could-NASA-defend-our-planet

  • OF OUR GENETIC DIFFERENCES (How Closely Or Distantly We’re Related)

    http://www.humanbiologicaldiversity.com/Photos/global-genetic-distances-map.jpgMAP OF OUR GENETIC DIFFERENCES

    (How Closely Or Distantly We’re Related)

    Source date (UTC): 2013-04-28 05:59:00 UTC

  • Measurable Planetary Boundary for the Biosphere Steven W. Running Forty years ag

    http://www.sciencemag.org/content/337/6101/1458.summaryA Measurable Planetary Boundary for the Biosphere

    Steven W. Running

    Forty years ago, Meadows et al. published a landmark first analysis of global limits to human activity (1). Based on a primitive computer model of the Earth system, they concluded that by the early decades of the 21st century, tangible limits to key global resources would begin to emerge. A reanalysis of the original results in 2008 found that the original global resource depletion projections were remarkably accurate (2). Since then, Rockström et al. (3) have defined a new term—planetary boundaries—to describe nine variables of high importance to habitability of Earth, including climate change, ocean acidification, land-use change, and biodiversity loss. These metrics are compelling conceptually, but many are not easily measured globally; explicitly defining a critical boundary is even more challenging. I suggest a new planetary boundary, terrestrial net primary (plant) production (NPP), that may be as compelling conceptually, integrates many of the currently defined variables, and is supported by an existing global data set for defining boundaries.

    Source date (UTC): 2013-04-21 13:34:00 UTC

  • IS SOCIOLOGY LEFTIST PROPAGANDA MASQUERADING AS SCIENCE? (I love answering quest

    IS SOCIOLOGY LEFTIST PROPAGANDA MASQUERADING AS SCIENCE?

    (I love answering questions like this.)

    Others have described the phenomenon imprecisely. I will have to try do better until someone does better than I:

    1) Sociology relies on surveys which are almost always false, because of natural properties innate in human psychology and cognitive processes. Sociology relies upon experiments, the conditions of which have greater affect on the answers provided than the natural environment in which teh behavior would be demonstrated. So in effect, ANY TEST that you issue will bias towards collectivist results, even if people will ACT upon individual incentives in the actual circumstance. This is pretty obvious really.

    2) Economics instead, relies upon demonstrated actions independent of tests. This is why economics has become the primary social science: we measure demonstrated actions rather than what people state they would do.

    3) Behavioral psychology tries to reduce the problem of sociological testing by proving the indvalidity of social surveys and tests. The only valuable survey information appears to be voting records, which if detailed enough, like economic data, demonstrate what people actually do rather than what they say they will do in any given circumstance.

    4) Sociology seems to attract people who are disproportionately subject to various collectivist biases, and the related cognitive biases. (Google ‘Common economic errors’, ‘Common Cognitive Biases’, “Common Social Cognitive Biases’.) We must remember, that the farther down the IQ scale you are, the more you must rely on the opinions, thoughts, and interpretations of otherse for your information. Every 15 points of IQ is about one standard deviation. That means people cannot really talk to each other easily across 15 points of difference and cannot even grasp each other’s world views or contexts, or implied causal relations at 30 points. THe predominance of science is improving this by repeated exposure

    5) The output of these surveys and experiments produces biased and therefore false information and conclusions, but the people who conduct them have both a subconscious bias, a preferential interest, and a career interest, and a political interest in believing and promoting the false outputs. There is a market for this false information available in public intellectuals, politicians and organizers. This false information is used for political purposes, under the pretense of academic neutrality, and empirically supported truth – none of which are true either.

    The public cannot understand this, the teachers use it because teachers are from the bottom 15% of graduating classes in intelligence, self select for the nurture bias, which is the source of left wing moral specialization, and must try to form homogeneity of interests among pupils with diverse backgrounds, and require justification for their actions. This is conversely why they cannot teach history or art history any longer, because this would require value judgements that distributed status signals to different members of a group that they seek to treat as homogenous family in order to control the room.

    Statistically speaking, in any university department sociologists will have the lowest IQ distribution of any of the major disciplines, economists, mathematicians and medical doctors the highest distribution. (Michigan study).

    For these reasons, the discipline of sociology is in fact, an unscientific tool of propaganda created, maintained, and used by the lowest IQ distribution in academia as a means of attepting to justify the failed communist, socialist, and now postmodernist ideology that seeks to compete against the natural sorting of people opportuntiy, income and political power behind those groups, families, and individuals with demonstrated meritocratic superiority in the market for goods, services, and military defense.

    Harsh words.

    True words.

    The conservatives are correct.

    Source date (UTC): 2013-04-12 05:27:00 UTC

  • Is Sociology Leftist Propaganda Masquerading As Science?

    THIS IS THE CORRECT ANSWER

    Others have described the phenomenon imprecisely. I will have to try do better until someone does better than I:

    1) Sociology relies on surveys which are almost always false, because of natural properties  innate in human psychology and cognitive processes.   Sociology relies upon experiments, the conditions of which have greater affect on the answers provided than the natural environment in which teh behavior would be demonstrated. So in effect, ANY TEST that you issue will bias towards collectivist results, even if people will ACT upon individual incentives in the actual circumstance. This is pretty obvious really. 

    2) Economics instead, relies upon demonstrated actions independent of tests. This is why economics has become the primary social science: we measure demonstrated actions rather than what people state they would do.

    3) Behavioral psychology tries to reduce the problem of sociological testing by proving the indvalidity of social surveys and tests.  The only valuable survey information appears to be voting records, which if detailed enough, like economic data, demonstrate what people actually do rather than what they say they will do in any given circumstance.

    4) Sociology seems to attract people who are disproportionately subject to various collectivist biases, and the related cognitive biases. (Google ‘Common economic errors’, ‘Common Cognitive Biases’, “Common Social Cognitive Biases’.)   We must remember, that the farther down the IQ scale you are, the more you must rely on the opinions, thoughts, and interpretations of otherse for your information.  Every 15 points of IQ is about one standard deviation.  That means people cannot really talk to each other easily across 15 points of difference and cannot even grasp each other’s world views or contexts, or implied causal relations at 30 points. THe predominance of science is improving this by repeated exposure

    5)  The output of these surveys and experiments produces biased and therefore false information and conclusions, but the people who conduct them have both a subconscious bias, a preferential interest, and a career interest, and a political interest in believing and promoting the false outputs.  There is a market for this false information available in public intellectuals, politicians and organizers. This false information is used for political purposes, under the pretense of academic neutrality, and empirically supported truth – none of which are true either.

    The public cannot understand this, the teachers use it because teachers are from the bottom 15% of graduating classes in intelligence, self select for the nurture bias, which is the source of left wing moral specialization, and must try to form homogeneity of interests among pupils with diverse backgrounds, and require justification for their actions. This is conversely why they cannot teach history or art history any longer, because this would require value judgements that distributed status signals to different members of a group that they seek to treat as  homogenous family in order to control the room.

    Statistically speaking, in any university department sociologists will have the lowest IQ distribution of any of the major disciplines, economists, mathematicians and medical doctors the highest distribution.  (Michigan study).

    For these reasons, the discipline of sociology is in fact, an unscientific tool of propaganda created, maintained, and  used by the lowest IQ distribution in academia as a means of attepting to justify the failed communist, socialist, and now postmodernist ideology that seeks to compete against the natural sorting of people opportuntiy, income and political power behind those groups, families, and individuals with demonstrated meritocratic superiority in the market for goods, services, and military defense.


    Harsh words.
    True words.
    The conservatives are correct.

    https://www.quora.com/Is-sociology-leftist-propaganda-masquerading-as-science

  • MYTH OF CANCER AND THE ENVIRONMENT

    http://slate.com/articles/health_and_science/medical_examiner/2013/03/cancer_cluster_in_toms_river_new_jersey_the_link_to_a_superfund_site_is.htmlTHE MYTH OF CANCER AND THE ENVIRONMENT

    Source date (UTC): 2013-03-21 01:24:00 UTC

  • “YOU ARE THE UNIVERSE, EXPRESSING ITSELF AS A HUMAN, FOR A LITTLE WHILE” Humans:

    “YOU ARE THE UNIVERSE, EXPRESSING ITSELF AS A HUMAN, FOR A LITTLE WHILE”

    Humans: the universe’s fascinating, and possibly unique experiment.

    Source date (UTC): 2013-03-11 01:42:00 UTC

  • METAPHYSICS I am pretty convinced that all the evidence available to us today co

    METAPHYSICS

    I am pretty convinced that all the evidence available to us today confirms that we experience the material universe correspondingly.

    That our perception can be extended to both micro and macro scales through devices.

    That our perception of causal relations can be extended through recording information at micro, normal, and macro scales and then replaying these recordings at higher speed so that patterns emerge within our visible perceptions.

    That our perception of such causal relations is limited by the very small number of axis of causality we can cognitively identify.

    That our ability to improve this process of causal analysis is limited by our current concept of mathematics.

    That our deductive capabilities are jaundiced by our various cognitive biases.

    That our particular human preferences limit our ability to reason clearly.

    That the variation in human ability and rationality limit our collective accomplishment.

    And that superior intelligence, memory, and perception would only increase the rate at which we comprehend these relations

    That superior distributions of knowledge and intelligence would further improve that rate.

    And that different biases and preferences would do little more than impede that understanding in different ways.

    But there is little if any evidence that the vast metaphysical and epistemological distraction enthralling the philosophical profession has produced insight or value.

    Humans must act. All else is entertainment.

    Source date (UTC): 2013-02-26 05:58:00 UTC

  • MUCH MEDICINE?

    http://www.cato-unbound.org/2007/09/10/robin-hanson/cut-medicine-in-half/TOO MUCH MEDICINE?

    Source date (UTC): 2013-02-18 16:15:00 UTC

  • REALITY OF THE SCIENTIFIC POLITY

    http://www.pewforum.org/Science-and-Bioethics/Scientists-and-Belief.aspxTHE REALITY OF THE SCIENTIFIC POLITY

    Source date (UTC): 2013-02-09 09:07:00 UTC