Looks like Ray Comfort found it too hard to write a 50-page introduction to Origin on his own: Metropulse.com, a Knoxville, TN local paper, has a story about Stan Guffey, a University of Tennessee lecturer who wrote a brief bio of Charles Darwin. Turns out that bio bears a striking resemblance to the first few pages of Comfort's introduction (you know, the part that isn't batshit crazy).
(HT Unreasonable Faith and AIG Busted.)
I find it ironic that the approach investigators use to detect plagiarism are similar to that taken by biologists to find homologies, which are one of the bits of evidence pointing to common descent.
So maybe Ray can use creationist arguments in his defense: "You cherry-picked your examples to make your case. If you look at the other 47 pages of the introduction, you'll see that it's nothing like anything Dr. Guffey has written", or "Similarities do not mean that I copied from Guffey. It's more likely that both texts were written by God." Or the ever-popular "Did anyone see copying take place? Then how do you know it happened?"
(Cross-posted at Epsilon Clue.)
Monday, December 14, 2009
Thursday, December 10, 2009
Cookies!
The gel electrophoresis cookies I mentioned at the meeting yesterday.
With links to lots more sweet sciencey confectionery.
With links to lots more sweet sciencey confectionery.
Thursday, November 12, 2009
Lobster signal!
Maybe we should get one of these.
(HT everyone's favorite arboreal crustacean skeptics, the Tree Lobsters.)
(HT everyone's favorite arboreal crustacean skeptics, the Tree Lobsters.)
Thursday, October 15, 2009
Dan Brown, The Secret, and the "What the Bleep" drinking game
Popdose is nominally about pop culture: music, movies, and whatnot. But in a post about Dan Brown's book The Lost Symbol, Jack Feerick had a go at all sorts of woo.
I'll only quote the What the (bleep) Do We Know? drinking game
I'll only quote the What the (bleep) Do We Know? drinking game
because you should really go read the whole thing.
- Every time someone says something evasive, take a drink.
- Every time someone takes an unjustifiable leap of logic, take ten drinks. Just because.
- Every time Marlee Matlin sighs, take a drink.
- Every time an unsourced anecdote is presented as fact, claim to take a drink.
- Every time the words “QUANTUM PHYSICS!” are uttered, take a drink and do not take a drink, simultaneously.
- Every time someone says “We can’t explain it,” or some variation thereof, take a drink.
- Any time somebody actually explains something… never mind, it won’t happen.
- Any time somebody proposes a violation of Newtonian physics, untake a drink.
(You might want to have a priest and an ambulance handy.)
Thursday, September 17, 2009
Bad Math at the Comcast Center
If you were at the Comcast Center today to see president Obama's speech, you may have caught Secretary of the Interior Gary Locke's opening act introduction.
In it he said that last year, health insurance premiums went up 15%, then asked "How many families' income went up 15% as well to make up for that?"
It's a fine rhetorical question, but the math is wrong: only part of a family's income goes toward paying health insurance premiums, so the total income needs to go up by a smaller percentage to keep everything else equal.
To illustrate with some completely made-up numbers: let's say a family makes $50,000 and spent $10000 of that on health insurance in 2007, leaving $40,000 for everything else. Premiums went up by 15%, or $1500, which means that in 2008, they had to pay $11500.
So in order to have the same $40,000 to spend on everything else, their total income would have to go from $50,000 to $51,500. That's an increase of 3%, not 15%.
In it he said that last year, health insurance premiums went up 15%, then asked "How many families' income went up 15% as well to make up for that?"
It's a fine rhetorical question, but the math is wrong: only part of a family's income goes toward paying health insurance premiums, so the total income needs to go up by a smaller percentage to keep everything else equal.
To illustrate with some completely made-up numbers: let's say a family makes $50,000 and spent $10000 of that on health insurance in 2007, leaving $40,000 for everything else. Premiums went up by 15%, or $1500, which means that in 2008, they had to pay $11500.
So in order to have the same $40,000 to spend on everything else, their total income would have to go from $50,000 to $51,500. That's an increase of 3%, not 15%.
Monday, August 24, 2009
Implication
Implication is one of those things we use every day, in "if... then" sentences. In mathematical notation, it's written "p → q", and it's defined as:
What trips most people up about it is the last two lines: how can it be true if the premise is false? An example should illustrate why it's defined this way.
Let's say that at the beginning of the semester, the instructor goes over the syllabus and grading, then says "Oh, and if you get 100% on the final, you automatically pass the course." Here, p is "you ace the final" and q is "you pass the course". At the end of the semester, one of four things will happen:
1) You ace the final, and pass the course.
2) You ace the final, but fail the course.
3) You don't ace the final, but still pass the course. This can happen if, say, you got 90% on the midterm and the final.
4) You don't ace the final, and don't pass the course. This can happen if, say, you get 20% on both the miderm and the final.
In the third case, I think we can agree that it would be unreasonable to storm into the instructor's office and say, "Hey! I didn't ace the final, but I passed anyway! You lied at the beginning of the semester!". It would be even more unreasonable, in the fourth case, to storm in and say "Hey! I failed the tests, and you failed me for the course! You lied at the beginning of the semester!".
In fact, the only case in which you'd have a legitimate grievance is the second case: "Hey! I aced the final, but you failed me anyway! You lied at the beginning of the semester!". (Note that I'm using hyperbole. I don't actually advocate yelling at instructors. Gregory House can get away with it because he's portrayed as an indispensable genius. You are most likely not an indespensable genius.)
This also has implications (see what I did there? I slay me) for how we evaluate claims. Again, let's look at a concrete example: let's say that I tell you that I can make it rain by washing my car. That is, I'm making a statement of the form p → q, where p is "I wash my car" and q is "it rains".
You are, of course, dubious. So I rattle off a list of times when I washed my car, and it rained within the following 24 hours, backed up by photos and NOAA archives. What should you do to see whether my claim is true or not?
You might be tempted to look at times when I didn't wash my car, but it rained anyway. In other words, where p ("I wash my car") is false, but q ("it rains") is true. But as we've seen above, "false → true" is itself true, and even if you find a hundred rainstorms when I didn't wash my car, it doesn't mean I'm wrong. Nor would it help to find cases when I didn't wash my car, and it also didn't rain. It does, after all, rain for reasons other than my clean-car fetish.
If you look at the table above, you'll see that there's only one case where implication is false. In fact, "p → q" can be rewritten as "it is not the case that p is true and q is false". This is a cumbersome way to put it, but it provides us with the way to proceed.
What you need to do is come up with a list of cases when I did wash my car, but it didn't rain. If you can come up with such a list, then you can definitely say that I'm wrong.
I think the reason this is confusing is that in colloquial speech, when people say "if" (p → q), what they really mean is "if and only if" (p↔q). When parents say "if you don't eat your carrots, you can't have dessert", they also mean "if you do eat your carrots, you can have dessert". If your friend says "If I'm free on Thursday, I'll meet you for dinner", we tacitly understand that as meaning, "If I'm not free, I won't meet you". But if we want to be careful in separating fact from fiction, we need to understand what claims are being made, and how to test them.
| if p is… | and q is… | then p → q is. |
|---|---|---|
| true | true | true |
| true | false | false |
| false | true | true |
| false | false | true |
What trips most people up about it is the last two lines: how can it be true if the premise is false? An example should illustrate why it's defined this way.
Let's say that at the beginning of the semester, the instructor goes over the syllabus and grading, then says "Oh, and if you get 100% on the final, you automatically pass the course." Here, p is "you ace the final" and q is "you pass the course". At the end of the semester, one of four things will happen:
1) You ace the final, and pass the course.
2) You ace the final, but fail the course.
3) You don't ace the final, but still pass the course. This can happen if, say, you got 90% on the midterm and the final.
4) You don't ace the final, and don't pass the course. This can happen if, say, you get 20% on both the miderm and the final.
In the third case, I think we can agree that it would be unreasonable to storm into the instructor's office and say, "Hey! I didn't ace the final, but I passed anyway! You lied at the beginning of the semester!". It would be even more unreasonable, in the fourth case, to storm in and say "Hey! I failed the tests, and you failed me for the course! You lied at the beginning of the semester!".
In fact, the only case in which you'd have a legitimate grievance is the second case: "Hey! I aced the final, but you failed me anyway! You lied at the beginning of the semester!". (Note that I'm using hyperbole. I don't actually advocate yelling at instructors. Gregory House can get away with it because he's portrayed as an indispensable genius. You are most likely not an indespensable genius.)
This also has implications (see what I did there? I slay me) for how we evaluate claims. Again, let's look at a concrete example: let's say that I tell you that I can make it rain by washing my car. That is, I'm making a statement of the form p → q, where p is "I wash my car" and q is "it rains".
You are, of course, dubious. So I rattle off a list of times when I washed my car, and it rained within the following 24 hours, backed up by photos and NOAA archives. What should you do to see whether my claim is true or not?
You might be tempted to look at times when I didn't wash my car, but it rained anyway. In other words, where p ("I wash my car") is false, but q ("it rains") is true. But as we've seen above, "false → true" is itself true, and even if you find a hundred rainstorms when I didn't wash my car, it doesn't mean I'm wrong. Nor would it help to find cases when I didn't wash my car, and it also didn't rain. It does, after all, rain for reasons other than my clean-car fetish.
If you look at the table above, you'll see that there's only one case where implication is false. In fact, "p → q" can be rewritten as "it is not the case that p is true and q is false". This is a cumbersome way to put it, but it provides us with the way to proceed.
What you need to do is come up with a list of cases when I did wash my car, but it didn't rain. If you can come up with such a list, then you can definitely say that I'm wrong.
I think the reason this is confusing is that in colloquial speech, when people say "if" (p → q), what they really mean is "if and only if" (p↔q). When parents say "if you don't eat your carrots, you can't have dessert", they also mean "if you do eat your carrots, you can have dessert". If your friend says "If I'm free on Thursday, I'll meet you for dinner", we tacitly understand that as meaning, "If I'm not free, I won't meet you". But if we want to be careful in separating fact from fiction, we need to understand what claims are being made, and how to test them.
Sunday, August 9, 2009
The credulous leading the gullible
The Washington Post has an interesting article about Nigerian email scammers. Near the end, there's this tidbit:
It's bad enough if you get scammed, but it's worse if the guy scamming you thinks that wearing a live tortoise around his neck will improve his love life.
Hm... maybe rubbing Testudo's nose has nothing to do with passing exams after all.
But in these tough times, the scammers said, they are relying more on a crucial tool: voodoo. At times, Banjo said, he has traveled six hours to the forest, where a magician sells scam-boosters. A $300 powder supposedly helps scammers "speak with authority" when demanding payment. A powder, rubbed on the face, reportedly makes victims viewing the scammer through webcams powerless to say no.
"No matter what, they will pay," said Olumide, a college student, adding that he is boosting his romance scams by wearing a magical, live tortoise hanging from a cord around his neck.
It's bad enough if you get scammed, but it's worse if the guy scamming you thinks that wearing a live tortoise around his neck will improve his love life.
Hm... maybe rubbing Testudo's nose has nothing to do with passing exams after all.
Thursday, July 30, 2009
Dara O'Brien mocks homeopaths
My favorite line: "I would take homeopaths and put them in a big sack with psychics, astrologers, and priests. And I'd close the top of the sack with string. And I'd hit them all with sticks. And I really wouldn't worry about who got the worst of it."
Via Bad Astronomy.
Wednesday, June 24, 2009
Interview with Tim Farley
The June 19 episode of American Freethought features an interview with Tim Farley, the guy behind Whatstheharm.net, a site that catalogs the very real costs (in both money and human lives) of lack of critical thinking.
Thursday, June 11, 2009
Government study finds "alternative medicine" doesn't work.
MSNBC is reporting that NIH's National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine has completed a $2.5 billion dollar study of alternative health remedies.
Guess which ones work?
While one might argue with the price tag, I'd argue that in principle, there's nothing wrong with investigating "alternative" or otherwise unconventional medical treatments. The point is not to prop up the pharmaceutical industry, but to find out what works and what doesn't.
"Alternative" in the sense of "practiced by folk sages, rather than men in lab coats" isn't a useful distinction. There is — or should be — only stuff that has been shown to work, and stuff that hasn't been shown to work.
(HT Phil Plait.)
Guess which ones work?
Echinacea for colds. Ginkgo biloba for memory. Glucosamine and chondroitin for arthritis. Black cohosh for menopausal hot flashes. Saw palmetto for prostate problems. Shark cartilage for cancer. All proved no better than dummy pills in big studies funded by the National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine. The lone exception: ginger capsules may help chemotherapy nausea.
While one might argue with the price tag, I'd argue that in principle, there's nothing wrong with investigating "alternative" or otherwise unconventional medical treatments. The point is not to prop up the pharmaceutical industry, but to find out what works and what doesn't.
"Alternative" in the sense of "practiced by folk sages, rather than men in lab coats" isn't a useful distinction. There is — or should be — only stuff that has been shown to work, and stuff that hasn't been shown to work.
(HT Phil Plait.)
Thursday, May 7, 2009
Tuesday, April 7, 2009
The Current Constitution
Constitution of the University of Maryland Society of Inquiry
Preamble
We, the members of the University of Maryland Society of Inquiry do hereby establish this Constitution in order that our purposes be realized to its fullest extent.
Article I – Name
The name of the organization will be the University of Maryland Society of Inquiry, henceforth referred to as UMDSI.
Article II – Purpose
UMDSI is established for the expressed purpose of:
a) Providing verifiably accurate information on specific subjects of interest to the University of Maryland community.
b) Promoting a skeptical mindset.
c) Advocating for scientific inquiry.
d) Creating a community of students interested in furthering the above.
UMDSI understands and is committed to fulfilling its responsibilities of abiding by University of Maryland College Park Policies.
Article III – Membership
Membership shall be limited to persons officially connected with the University of Maryland, College Park as faculty, staff or registered students. All members must complete a statement of membership at least on an annual basis. Students enrolled in the spring semester as well as students enrolled in summer school are eligible for summer membership.
In addition, the following requirements are necessary to constitute voting membership:
-Currently registered undergraduate.
-Attendance of at least 3 meetings during the current or previous semester.
-Active participation in the organization to be determined by the organization.
UMDSI openly admits students to its membership and does not discriminate on the basis of race, color, creed, sex, sexual orientation, marital status, personal appearance, age, national origin, political affiliation, physical or mental disability, or on the basis of rights secured by the First Amendment of the United States Constitution.
Article IV – Officers
UMDSI will be governed by the following means:
1. An elected President will preside at all meetings of UMDSI. The President will maintain the power to appoint all committee chairpersons, shall present all motions to the body present and shall be present at 90% of the meetings of UMDSI. The President of UMDSI will be the SGA liaison.
2. UMDSI shall also maintain a Vice President. The Vice President’s duties shall be to preside at all meetings and functions that the President cannot attend.
3. Club members shall also elect a Treasurer who will handle all dues, accounts, new members, and rule observances at stated meetings.
4. The role and duties of the faculty advisor shall include attending meetings and providing counsel to the organizations officers etc.
5. All officers of UMDSI must be currently registered undergraduate students.
Article V – Operations
1. Voting Eligibility: Members meeting all requirements of voting membership as set forth in Article II will be granted voting privileges.
2. Election Process: All officers shall be elected by a majority vote of eligible voting members of UMDSI. All elections will be held on an annual basis during the month of April.
The president will take nominations from the floor, the nomination process must
be closed and the movement seconded. The nominated parties will be allowed to
vote.
Officers shall be elected by secret ballot to be collected and tabulated by the Treasurer and one voting member of UMDSI, appointed by the outgoing President.
3. Removal: Any officer of UMDSI in violation of the constitution may be removed from office by the following process:
a. A written request by at least three members of UMDSI.
b. Written notification to the officer of the request, asking the officer to be present at the next meeting and prepared to speak.
c. A two-thirds (2/3) majority vote is necessary to remove the officer.
4. Meetings: At least five meetings pre semester will occur with sufficient notice and will include the following if applicable:
a. Attendance.
b. Reports by the President.
c. Committee Reports
d. Votes on all committee motions and decisions
e. Any other business put forth by the members of the club.
f. Dismissal of the President.
Article VI – Finances
UMDSI will finance the activities it engages in by the following means:
1. Activity fees
a. To be determined by the officers.
UMDSI will submit a budget to the Student Government Association Finance Committee on an annual basis.
Article VII – Amendments
The constitution is binding to all members of UMDSI. But the constitution is not binding unto itself.
a. Amendments to the constitution may be proposed in writing by any voting member of UMDSI at any meeting at which 2/3 of the voting members are present.
b. These amendments will be placed on the agenda for the next regular meeting of the executive council or other officer grouping.
c. Proposed amendments will become effective following approval of two thirds (2/3)-majority vote of voting members.
Article VIII - Registration Renewal
UMDSI will apply to the Office of Campus Programs for registration on an annual basis one month after UMDSI’s new officer elections.
Preamble
We, the members of the University of Maryland Society of Inquiry do hereby establish this Constitution in order that our purposes be realized to its fullest extent.
Article I – Name
The name of the organization will be the University of Maryland Society of Inquiry, henceforth referred to as UMDSI.
Article II – Purpose
UMDSI is established for the expressed purpose of:
a) Providing verifiably accurate information on specific subjects of interest to the University of Maryland community.
b) Promoting a skeptical mindset.
c) Advocating for scientific inquiry.
d) Creating a community of students interested in furthering the above.
UMDSI understands and is committed to fulfilling its responsibilities of abiding by University of Maryland College Park Policies.
Article III – Membership
Membership shall be limited to persons officially connected with the University of Maryland, College Park as faculty, staff or registered students. All members must complete a statement of membership at least on an annual basis. Students enrolled in the spring semester as well as students enrolled in summer school are eligible for summer membership.
In addition, the following requirements are necessary to constitute voting membership:
-Currently registered undergraduate.
-Attendance of at least 3 meetings during the current or previous semester.
-Active participation in the organization to be determined by the organization.
UMDSI openly admits students to its membership and does not discriminate on the basis of race, color, creed, sex, sexual orientation, marital status, personal appearance, age, national origin, political affiliation, physical or mental disability, or on the basis of rights secured by the First Amendment of the United States Constitution.
Article IV – Officers
UMDSI will be governed by the following means:
1. An elected President will preside at all meetings of UMDSI. The President will maintain the power to appoint all committee chairpersons, shall present all motions to the body present and shall be present at 90% of the meetings of UMDSI. The President of UMDSI will be the SGA liaison.
2. UMDSI shall also maintain a Vice President. The Vice President’s duties shall be to preside at all meetings and functions that the President cannot attend.
3. Club members shall also elect a Treasurer who will handle all dues, accounts, new members, and rule observances at stated meetings.
4. The role and duties of the faculty advisor shall include attending meetings and providing counsel to the organizations officers etc.
5. All officers of UMDSI must be currently registered undergraduate students.
Article V – Operations
1. Voting Eligibility: Members meeting all requirements of voting membership as set forth in Article II will be granted voting privileges.
2. Election Process: All officers shall be elected by a majority vote of eligible voting members of UMDSI. All elections will be held on an annual basis during the month of April.
The president will take nominations from the floor, the nomination process must
be closed and the movement seconded. The nominated parties will be allowed to
vote.
Officers shall be elected by secret ballot to be collected and tabulated by the Treasurer and one voting member of UMDSI, appointed by the outgoing President.
3. Removal: Any officer of UMDSI in violation of the constitution may be removed from office by the following process:
a. A written request by at least three members of UMDSI.
b. Written notification to the officer of the request, asking the officer to be present at the next meeting and prepared to speak.
c. A two-thirds (2/3) majority vote is necessary to remove the officer.
4. Meetings: At least five meetings pre semester will occur with sufficient notice and will include the following if applicable:
a. Attendance.
b. Reports by the President.
c. Committee Reports
d. Votes on all committee motions and decisions
e. Any other business put forth by the members of the club.
f. Dismissal of the President.
Article VI – Finances
UMDSI will finance the activities it engages in by the following means:
1. Activity fees
a. To be determined by the officers.
UMDSI will submit a budget to the Student Government Association Finance Committee on an annual basis.
Article VII – Amendments
The constitution is binding to all members of UMDSI. But the constitution is not binding unto itself.
a. Amendments to the constitution may be proposed in writing by any voting member of UMDSI at any meeting at which 2/3 of the voting members are present.
b. These amendments will be placed on the agenda for the next regular meeting of the executive council or other officer grouping.
c. Proposed amendments will become effective following approval of two thirds (2/3)-majority vote of voting members.
Article VIII - Registration Renewal
UMDSI will apply to the Office of Campus Programs for registration on an annual basis one month after UMDSI’s new officer elections.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)