Playing the science game.
- Gawdzilla Sama
- Stabsobermaschinist
- Posts: 151265
- Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 12:24 am
- About me: My posts are related to the thread in the same way Gliese 651b is related to your mother's underwear drawer.
- Location: Sitting next to Ayaan in Domus Draconis, and communicating via PMs.
- Contact:
Playing the science game.
Borrowed from:
Playing by the Rules
Harriet Hall
Volume 33.3, May / June 2009 Skeptical Inquirer.
If you want to play the science game, here's what you do:
1. Submit your hypothesis to proper testing. Testimonials, intuitions, personal experience, and "other ways of knowing" don't count.
2. See if you can falsify the hypothesis.
3. Try to rule out alternative explanations and confounding factors.
4. Report your findings in journal articles submitted to peer review.
5. Allow the scientific community to critique the published evidence and engage in dialogue and debate.
6. Withhold judgment until your results can be replicated elsewhere.
7. Respect the consensus of the majority of the scientific community as to whether your hypothesis is probably
true or false (always allowing for revision based on further evidence).
8. Be willing to follow the evidence and admit you are wrong if that's what the evidence says.
If you want to play the science game, here are some of the things you don't do:
1. Accuse the entire scientific community of being wrong (unless you have compelling evidence, in which case you should argue for it in the scientific journals and
at professional meetings, not in the media).
2. Design poor-quality experiments that are almost guaranteed to show your hypothesis is true whether it really is or not. Use science to show that your treatment works, not to ask if it works.
3. Keep using arguments that have been thoroughly discredited. (The intelligent design folks are still claiming the eye could not have evolved because it is irreducibly complex; homeopaths are still claiming homeopathy cured more patients than conventional medicine during nineteenth-century epidemics).
4. Write books for the general public to promote your thesis—as if public opinion could influence science!
5. Form an activist organization to promote your beliefs.
6. Step outside the scientific paradigm and appeal to intuition and belief.
7. Mention the persecution of Galileo and compare yourself to him.
8. Invent a conspiracy theory
(Big Pharma is suppressing the truth!).
9. Claim to be a lone genius who knows more than all scientists put together.
10. Offer a treatment to the public after only the most preliminary studies have been conducted.
11. Set up a Web site to sell products that are not backed by good evidence.
12. Refuse to admit when your hypothesis is proven wrong.
Playing by the Rules
Harriet Hall
Volume 33.3, May / June 2009 Skeptical Inquirer.
If you want to play the science game, here's what you do:
1. Submit your hypothesis to proper testing. Testimonials, intuitions, personal experience, and "other ways of knowing" don't count.
2. See if you can falsify the hypothesis.
3. Try to rule out alternative explanations and confounding factors.
4. Report your findings in journal articles submitted to peer review.
5. Allow the scientific community to critique the published evidence and engage in dialogue and debate.
6. Withhold judgment until your results can be replicated elsewhere.
7. Respect the consensus of the majority of the scientific community as to whether your hypothesis is probably
true or false (always allowing for revision based on further evidence).
8. Be willing to follow the evidence and admit you are wrong if that's what the evidence says.
If you want to play the science game, here are some of the things you don't do:
1. Accuse the entire scientific community of being wrong (unless you have compelling evidence, in which case you should argue for it in the scientific journals and
at professional meetings, not in the media).
2. Design poor-quality experiments that are almost guaranteed to show your hypothesis is true whether it really is or not. Use science to show that your treatment works, not to ask if it works.
3. Keep using arguments that have been thoroughly discredited. (The intelligent design folks are still claiming the eye could not have evolved because it is irreducibly complex; homeopaths are still claiming homeopathy cured more patients than conventional medicine during nineteenth-century epidemics).
4. Write books for the general public to promote your thesis—as if public opinion could influence science!
5. Form an activist organization to promote your beliefs.
6. Step outside the scientific paradigm and appeal to intuition and belief.
7. Mention the persecution of Galileo and compare yourself to him.
8. Invent a conspiracy theory
(Big Pharma is suppressing the truth!).
9. Claim to be a lone genius who knows more than all scientists put together.
10. Offer a treatment to the public after only the most preliminary studies have been conducted.
11. Set up a Web site to sell products that are not backed by good evidence.
12. Refuse to admit when your hypothesis is proven wrong.
- Psi Wavefunction
- Cекси техническая лаборатория
- Posts: 1880
- Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 10:06 am
- About me: I kill threads WITH SCIENCE!
I like Crascuits. :coffee: - Location: Vancouver
- Contact:
Re: Playing the science game.
Damn, the dark side seems more fun!
Not to mention helluvalot easier...
Not to mention helluvalot easier...

- Gawdzilla Sama
- Stabsobermaschinist
- Posts: 151265
- Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 12:24 am
- About me: My posts are related to the thread in the same way Gliese 651b is related to your mother's underwear drawer.
- Location: Sitting next to Ayaan in Domus Draconis, and communicating via PMs.
- Contact:
Re: Playing the science game.
"The Dark Side clouds everything." [/little froggy guy with hairy ears]Psi Wavefunction wrote:Damn, the dark side seems more fun!
Not to mention helluvalot easier...
- AshtonBlack
- Tech Monkey
- Posts: 7773
- Joined: Mon Mar 09, 2009 8:01 pm
- Location: <insert witty joke locaction here>
- Contact:
Re: Playing the science game.
"Never underestimate the POWER of the dark side of the force!" [/ugly bloke in a hooded robe and an asthmatic tall chum]Gawdzilla wrote:"The Dark Side clouds everything." [/little froggy guy with hairy ears]Psi Wavefunction wrote:Damn, the dark side seems more fun!
Not to mention helluvalot easier...
10 Fuck Off
20 GOTO 10
Ashton Black wrote:"Dogma is the enemy, not religion, per se. Rationality, genuine empathy and intellectual integrity are anathema to dogma."
- Gawdzilla Sama
- Stabsobermaschinist
- Posts: 151265
- Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 12:24 am
- About me: My posts are related to the thread in the same way Gliese 651b is related to your mother's underwear drawer.
- Location: Sitting next to Ayaan in Domus Draconis, and communicating via PMs.
- Contact:
Re: Playing the science game.
I'll take the Jedi to win. Fifty bob.AshtonBlack wrote:"Never underestimate the POWER of the dark side of the force!" [/ugly bloke in a hooded robe and an asthmatic tall chum]Gawdzilla wrote:"The Dark Side clouds everything." [/little froggy guy with hairy ears]Psi Wavefunction wrote:Damn, the dark side seems more fun!
Not to mention helluvalot easier...
- AshtonBlack
- Tech Monkey
- Posts: 7773
- Joined: Mon Mar 09, 2009 8:01 pm
- Location: <insert witty joke locaction here>
- Contact:
Re: Playing the science game.
18 gold sovereigns on the blokes with the cool powers! (dark side, obviously....)Gawdzilla wrote:I'll take the Jedi to win. Fifty bob.AshtonBlack wrote:"Never underestimate the POWER of the dark side of the force!" [/ugly bloke in a hooded robe and an asthmatic tall chum]Gawdzilla wrote:"The Dark Side clouds everything." [/little froggy guy with hairy ears]Psi Wavefunction wrote:Damn, the dark side seems more fun!
Not to mention helluvalot easier...
10 Fuck Off
20 GOTO 10
Ashton Black wrote:"Dogma is the enemy, not religion, per se. Rationality, genuine empathy and intellectual integrity are anathema to dogma."
- Gawdzilla Sama
- Stabsobermaschinist
- Posts: 151265
- Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 12:24 am
- About me: My posts are related to the thread in the same way Gliese 651b is related to your mother's underwear drawer.
- Location: Sitting next to Ayaan in Domus Draconis, and communicating via PMs.
- Contact:
Re: Playing the science game.
"Hate sells, but love is better for repeat business."AshtonBlack wrote:18 gold sovereigns on the blokes with the cool powers! (dark side, obviously....)

- Gawdzilla Sama
- Stabsobermaschinist
- Posts: 151265
- Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 12:24 am
- About me: My posts are related to the thread in the same way Gliese 651b is related to your mother's underwear drawer.
- Location: Sitting next to Ayaan in Domus Draconis, and communicating via PMs.
- Contact:
- lsdetroit
- Telepathetic
- Posts: 2296
- Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 4:26 pm
- About me: ask your mother.
- Location: Bloomfield Hills, MI
- Contact:
Re: Playing the science game.
this wonderful life was brought to you in part by: The Scientific Method, making life easier and creating endless luxuriess while being hastely over-looked every day.
"When you do things right, people won't be sure you've done anything at all."
- Gawdzilla Sama
- Stabsobermaschinist
- Posts: 151265
- Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 12:24 am
- About me: My posts are related to the thread in the same way Gliese 651b is related to your mother's underwear drawer.
- Location: Sitting next to Ayaan in Domus Draconis, and communicating via PMs.
- Contact:
Re: Playing the science game.
You can always tell when some people have been trying to figure out something scientific, there are two sooty patches above their ears.lsdetroit wrote:this wonderful life was brought to you in part by: The Scientific Method, making life easier and creating endless luxuriess while being hastely over-looked every day.
- Horwood Beer-Master
- "...a complete Kentish hog"
- Posts: 7061
- Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 2:34 pm
- Location: Wandering somewhere around the Darenth Valley - Kent
- Contact:
Re: Playing the science game.
A powerful Sith you will become. Henceforth, you shall be known as Darth... ..Crascuits.Psi Wavefunction wrote:Damn, the dark side seems more fun!
Not to mention helluvalot easier...![]()
(By the way, WTF are Crascuits?)

- lsdetroit
- Telepathetic
- Posts: 2296
- Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 4:26 pm
- About me: ask your mother.
- Location: Bloomfield Hills, MI
- Contact:
Re: Playing the science game.
Gawdzilla wrote:You can always tell when some people have been trying to figure out something scientific, there are two sooty patches above their ears.lsdetroit wrote:this wonderful life was brought to you in part by: The Scientific Method, making life easier and creating endless luxuriess while being hastely over-looked every day.

"When you do things right, people won't be sure you've done anything at all."
- Gawdzilla Sama
- Stabsobermaschinist
- Posts: 151265
- Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 12:24 am
- About me: My posts are related to the thread in the same way Gliese 651b is related to your mother's underwear drawer.
- Location: Sitting next to Ayaan in Domus Draconis, and communicating via PMs.
- Contact:
- Psi Wavefunction
- Cекси техническая лаборатория
- Posts: 1880
- Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 10:06 am
- About me: I kill threads WITH SCIENCE!
I like Crascuits. :coffee: - Location: Vancouver
- Contact:
Re: Playing the science game.
Once upon a time before I knew what Scientology was, I actually thought it'd have something to do with 'science' because of the name. That was around middle school.
I mean, BURN, scientific method, BURN!
[/Darth Crascuits]
I mean, BURN, scientific method, BURN!

- FBM
- Ratz' first Gritizen.
- Posts: 45327
- Joined: Fri Mar 27, 2009 12:43 pm
- About me: Skeptic. "Because it does not contend
It is therefore beyond reproach" - Contact:
Re: Playing the science game.
I'll trust science when they resolve the problem of induction.
The final paragraph:
I'll be learnin' up on how to read tea leaves. It's a lot quicker and no partial differentials to screw with...
The final paragraph:
(emphasis mine)If we accept the analysis of inductive reasoning sketched above, it may seem that Hume as done something remarkable and disturbing. He has shown that from a strictly intellectual point of view, there is no real difference between common sense and science on the one hand, and religious belief on the other. In all three cases we find a system of belief based on a fundamental conviction that cannot be justified by argument. The most dramatic way to put the point is to say that Hume has shown that common sense and science are matters of faith. Hume would resist this attempt to rehabilitate religion by "softening up" our picture of common sense and science. The faith that Hume defends is a faith that we cannot possibly avoid or resist, a faith that renders skeptical doubt utterly idle. The religious case is very different, at least on the face of it. What we shall have to ask, as we proceed, is whether this difference really makes a difference.
I'll be learnin' up on how to read tea leaves. It's a lot quicker and no partial differentials to screw with...

"A philosopher is a blind man in a dark room looking for a black cat that isn't there. A theologian is the man who finds it." ~ H. L. Mencken
"We ain't a sharp species. We kill each other over arguments about what happens when you die, then fail to see the fucking irony in that."
"It is useless for the sheep to pass resolutions in favor of vegetarianism while the wolf remains of a different opinion."
"We ain't a sharp species. We kill each other over arguments about what happens when you die, then fail to see the fucking irony in that."
"It is useless for the sheep to pass resolutions in favor of vegetarianism while the wolf remains of a different opinion."
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests