Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | t0mpr1c3's commentslogin

> The replication crisis in science is particularly bad within the social sciences

This is true. Your conclusion is false and prejudicial. The problem is better characterized as social science is being harder to do well than we tohught.


> > And for sociology, the problem isn't that the math is too hard, it's that the practice of sociology is pretty much a political exercise masquerading as science.

> The problem is better characterized as social science is being harder to do well than we tohught.

And the thing that makes it had to do well is that it's easy to know ahead of time what experimental result will best favor your existing beliefs.


Well put. It's easy to attack people attempting to work on hard problems for not achieving perfect results. Which they don't. Because IT'S HARD.

Weirdly, these critics never have useful suggestions to improve anything, it's all just personal attacks at one remove.

I mean, frankly, we wouldn't need a lot of these studies if people in power were slightly more willing to just believe (usually minority) people who talk about the problems they have.

Black soldiers were denied home loans after ww2; white soldiers were not; many white families therefor benefitted from owning a home (appreciation of value and safety/stability) in ways that black families did not.

Do we need a study on that? I mean, it doesn't hurt anything, but we could also just read some reports and talk to some people and then realize "hey this is messed up"


> The IPCC has been in defensive mode for a few years now. They made claims that absolutely made no sense and haven't answered to obvious criticism for years now. Only now they are very slow in backpedalling. Why should anyone still trust them? You can read IPCC reports all day long - if they still contain obvious flaws - it's not going to impress... If you check related websites you find a lot of propaganda - and very little science. They stopped caring about using arguments years ago. I looked for science there and only found low quality rubbish.

> The only thing going for them is the argument from authority. But once you know people in academia this doesn't work any more. I personally know a climate scientists (he published 40 papers). He showed a lot of signs of mental issues - most likely he is completely nuts - From experience I've seen that competent guys don't go to work in academia - it's mostly a cargo cult society for guys from the 2nd and 3rd intellectual league. Just look at them - I've seen more religious nuts and real flat-earthers there than anywhere else. I know a lot of guys in academia and even the most sane one is still leading the UFO-club...

Thank goodness honest citizens like "AdornKey" are around to pinpoint the precise reasons why the international community of climate scientists are crazy, stupid, closed-minded, and ignorant. I am certainly glad that "AdornKey" made this laser-focused contribution to my understanding.


While I wouldn't argue that academia is "crazy, stupid, closed-minded, and ignorant", I would absolutely argue that they are ideologically homogenous. The whole community is rife with political signaling and affinity groups.

Please refrain from personal attacks.

Does "he started it" count?

This is a great time for the Trump administration to dismantle the system of oceanic data collection.

If the evidence on worrying climatic events does not exist, we don't have to ignore and discredit it.

https://oceanographicmagazine.com/news/trump-administration-...


std::range fixes this

People are not terribly well informed on the specifics. Every time Spotify queues up a song, it has been selected by AI. That's been happening for a while without people getting upset about the effect on the employment of disc jockeys.

I am guessing the threshold is when changes outgrow mere consumer convenience and start being something imposed without choice.


People rave about Cosmic Crisp apples, but to me they are bland. I prefer a balance between sweet and tart.

I just want tart. Give me a Granny Smith any day. They also make the best pies.

The best cooking apple is a Bramley, which retains both acid and firm texture when cooked. But Granny Smith is a good substitute.

Wait what? Cosmic Crisp is like the clearest example of a balance between sweet and tart. What would you consider a balanced variety?

Pink Lady, Snapdragon, Sweetango are all probably closer to alanced compared to Cosmic Crisp. Cosmic Crisp being more tart than Sugarbee, but still definitely more sweet than tart in flavor profile IMO.

Sweetango and Pink Lady are probably what I would consider balanced sweet and tart.


Interesting. Pink Lady is a favorite for me, and Sweetango is great too, but I'd consider Cosmic Crisp very, very close to Pink Lady in overall balance (I do agree Pink Lady is better though). I'm in Canada and Cosmic Crisp is special / protected and seems to always have to come from the States, whereas I can get the others fresher and grown locally, so perhaps that is a factor.

I'm a honeycrisp fanatic (and it's a good balance of sweet/tart for me). This is the first I've heard of Sweetango, I don't think I've seen them in the grocery stores. Will be keeping my eyes peeled.

Unlike many other apple varieties these days, SweeTango are only available in traditional "apple season" (Autumn months through November in the USA). I've long been a fan of HoneyCrisp, so I tried SweeTango, and while it was quite good, I still prefer HoneyCrisp. I had a similar experience with Cosmic Crisp--not as good as HoneyCrisp, but nice for some variety.

Cox's Orange Pippin cannot be beat. Goldrush, best apple I've had in the USA.

`callcc` was obsoleted about 10 years ago. I don't know if it has been removed yet. https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/10548

Naturally, the writer who is publishing this platitude believes that he is much more intelligent than anyone who might read it.

He is just telling them where they are in the heirarchy.


I hope you didn't type that comment using a cell phone, because IARC also suspects that to be carcinogenic.

IARC is not a regulatory body, and its categories do not address disease risk.

Maybe FDA got this right. I bet you dollars to donuts that putting TiO2 on your skin reduces the risk of cancer.


The FDA... Which doesn't do it's own studies and trusts the study results of the manufacturers who want to sell their products?

Why would FDA do its own studies? It's a regulatory body. (Do you know what NIH does?)

"My smoke alarm is no good because it never turned off my stove."


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: