New Science-- is that like New Math?
From James Taylor in Environmental & Climate News...
New Scientist magazine is throwing a tantrum—stamping its feet, covering its ears, and holding its breath until its face turns blue (or red, in this case)—because tens of thousands of scientists and the majority of the American public recognizes humans are not causing a global warming crisis.
Dedicating a full issue to smarmy attacks on scientists who follow that obsolete, politically incorrect code of scientific inquiry known as the Scientific Method, New Scientist’s “Age of Denial” issue attempts to throw enough mud, ignore enough science, and employ enough discredited propagandists to convince the American public to ignore the fact that scare scenario after scare scenario has been discredited by sound science and failed to materialize in the real world....
posted by Eric Schansberg @ 1:52 PM
2 Comments
2 Comments:
What used to be called "New Math" was totally rigorous of course.
Some of what gets taught these days under the name of "mathematical modelling" should raise some eyebrows.
Example: "Which model is best for used car prices - linear, quadratic, or exponential?"
Sorry, I lost the last part of that post.
The suggested conclusion is "Used car prices decay exponentially because those are the only three buttons on my calculator."
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home