Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Andir]

False color astronomy isn't to make the pictures "prettier" it is to allow them to display data outside the visible spectrum or make less perceptible difference more apparent.

Anything in the press has been photoshoped. I have no reason to assume this isn't true for astronomic pictures.

http://www.universetoday.com/11863/true-or-false-color-the-art-of-extraterrestrial-photography/
They don't "photoshop" (negative connotation) the images, but I don't doubt they use Photoshop to join and/or clean up some.

[GlyphGryph]

And my point was that if you assume thats true for pictures, why wouldn't you also extend it to the rest of it? Science doesn't often work the way reporters (and others) think it does.

Example:
A study finds that:
a chemical that has a certain effect on population 1
the chemical does not have the effect on population 2
there is no difference between the effects on population 1 and 2

In science, results like that are not uncommon. But they don't make any sense to the layman, because the layman doesn't understand how science works. And the scientists doing the studies often manage to get it wrong, because some 2 of the 3 is more personally profitable than all three together, so they cherry pick.

See http://www.nature.com/neuro/journal/v14/n9/full/nn.2886.html if you want more details.

What's the point? Science is hard, and science is complicated, and by the time it gets to you it probably doesn't mean what the data actually said any more. It's a game of telephone, where every party along the line has an incentive to hear something they want to hear.

Frankly, I think the "50% of women are raped" statistic is probably a by product of the same process, simply because it doesn't agree with the rest of the data that's out there.

[Neonivek]

Actually one of the many ways false statistics are created, outside of intentionally botching the research (which is a LOT more common then you think and it isn't considered fraud), is to simply misinterpret the material available.

Case and point a while back Canada got a statistic that said it was punishing its own children more then most of the world (and more then any developed country). The common interpretation was that Canada was sending more children to jail, fines, and other forms of harsh punishment more then any other part.

However when people were trying to get the Young Offender's act (I think that was its name at the time. That may be after this. It could be the Youth Criminal act I am thinking of) they brought up that the statistic was gained simply by adding up everytime a child was sentenced.

So if a child was sent to his room without supper, and did so 5 more times, the statistic would seem like 5 more children were severely punished. The statistic didn't change, just the interpretation of the data.

The Rape statistic could be inflated in any number of ways without outright faking it just by messing around with the interpretation.

And yes... Glyph is also right htat you can simply get unlucky and have the statistic swing that way.

[Virex]

While that may be true, it is also very possible that other research has structurally underappreciated the problem. Considering the pervasiveness of the patriarchy in all forms of science, I would even value the chance that the other studies suffer from a downward confirmation bias very high. After all, you indicated yourself that the idea that the problem can't be this big is quite a common one, and we scientists are also but normal people.

[Neonivek]

While that may be true, it is also very possible that other research has structurally underappreciated the problem. Considering the pervasiveness of the patriarchy in all forms of science, I would even value the chance that the other studies suffer from a downward confirmation bias very high. After all, you indicated yourself that the idea that the problem can't be this big is quite a common one, and we scientists are also but normal people.

I call what I do to be my "Common sense Inertia". It isn't that I can't be swayed, it is that I am not being presented with means at which it is possible.

Sometimes I am not convinced of something until says after I hear it just by dwelling on it.

[GlyphGryph]

And I'd argue that those doing a study on rape statistics would have a much larger incentive to report higher than lower (since it would garner more attention), reporters would have a reason to report higher (since who wants to read another report that says rape is just as low as all the others?), and sheer chance says at least some should be higher (and this one is significantly higher).

I don't think "the problem can't be that big", I think the evidence doesn't support the claim that it is. It might be 100% correct, within the context of the study, but I don't actually know the context of the study or the other factors involved in making the claim. Since I've read through several rape studies, I know their methodology is absolutely terrible, on average, and I doubt this one is exceptional in that regard except insofar as their numbers being higher.

I'm not saying its wrong - I'm just saying it is very unlikely to be true in the way it was claimed to be true.

[Virex]

And I'd argue that those doing a study on rape statistics would have a much larger incentive to report higher than lower (since it would garner more attention), reporters would have a reason to report higher (since who wants to read another report that says rape is just as low as all the others?), and sheer chance says at least some should be higher (and this one is significantly higher).

It would also garner the attention of your chefs and the peer reviewers, and those groups generally include only men. Sure you may get some hits, but you're also killing your career.

[Neonivek]

Ahh yes now we get into people being Cowed by the magnitude of the statistic.

Which is what I find interesting. You get something serious and taboo enough and in combat terms it is like fighting up a hill.

It would also garner the attention of your chefs and the peer reviewers, and those groups generally include only men. Sure you may get some hits, but you're also killing your career

You meet the worst men Virex.

Also the worst Chefs.

[Andir]

And my point was that if you assume thats true for pictures, why wouldn't you also extend it to the rest of it? Science doesn't often work the way reporters (and others) think it does.

Example:
A study finds that:
a chemical that has a certain effect on population 1
the chemical does not have the effect on population 2
there is no difference between the effects on population 1 and 2

In science, results like that are not uncommon. But they don't make any sense to the layman, because the layman doesn't understand how science works. And the scientists doing the studies often manage to get it wrong, because some 2 of the 3 is more personally profitable than all three together, so they cherry pick.

See http://www.nature.com/neuro/journal/v14/n9/full/nn.2886.html if you want more details.

What's the point? Science is hard, and science is complicated, and by the time it gets to you it probably doesn't mean what the data actually said any more. It's a game of telephone, where every party along the line has an incentive to hear something they want to hear.

Heck, there's a huge one that I see used a lot: The "Fabric of Space-Time."  Teaching people that the Earth is like a huge bowling ball on a sheet of cloth with a smaller ball called The Moon.

[Leafsnail]

Frankly, I think the "50% of women are raped" statistic is probably a by product of the same process, simply because it doesn't agree with the rest of the data that's out there.

It's also not a statistic which anyone has linked to.  Making up statistics, even ones which you're claiming to be wrong is kindof disingenious.

[Virex]

To be honest, it was Neonivek who brought it up.

You meet the worst men Virex.

Also the worst Chefs.

You're talking like they're a minority?

[Il Palazzo]

Heck, there's a huge one that I see used a lot: The "Fabric of Space-Time."  Teaching people that the Earth is like a huge bowling ball on a sheet of cloth with a smaller ball called The Moon.

I've noticed you have a personal vendetta against some of the analogies physics uses to illustrate the more exotic of its ideas, Andir.

[Neonivek]

Frankly, I think the "50% of women are raped" statistic is probably a by product of the same process, simply because it doesn't agree with the rest of the data that's out there.

It's also not a statistic which anyone has linked to.  Making up statistics, even ones which you're claiming to be wrong is kindof disingenious.

You mean me? I am quoting a topic from way back ago... I do not want to look for it.

You're talking like we're a minority?

Who men? or Woman? or humans? Or Chefs? or Chefs with the power to cook in such a way that you can lose your job?

Who are this "we" we are talking about? I don't have Gender/sex vision goggles.

[Virex]

I was referring to those supposedly "evil" men I apparently meet all the time.
Oh wait, did I write 'we'? I think we'd better mark that off as a typo (lest we get into an argument over that again)

[Neonivek]

I was referring to those supposedly "evil" men I apparently meet all the time.

Men are the minority to be technical (well in developed countries)