53 ms·

That his research subject has not given "proper" scientific results yet (or ever) doesn't make him a fraud. We wouldn't go far if researchers could only researc

by k_ 3y ago

That his research subject has not given "proper" scientific results yet (or ever) doesn't make him a fraud. We wouldn't go far if researchers could only research proven concepts.

hk__2 3y ago
> That his research subject has not given "proper" scientific results yet (or ever) doesn't make him a fraud. We wouldn't go far if researchers could only research proven concepts. The problem is we’re looking at the correct predictions only. He’s a broken clock, he "predicted" numerous earthquakes in various regions and only a small number ended up true. > The idea that planetary alignments can predict earthquakes has been long rebuffed by scientists. The USGS has stated that neither it nor any other scientist is able to predict a specific earthquake, but that it can calculate the probability of future temblors. Andrew Michael, a geophysicist for the agency, called alignment-based predictions "easy to refute" in a statement sent to Snopes. https://www.snopes.com/news/2017/03/01/dutch-earthquake-enthusiast-claims-to-predict-major-tremor/ https://www.snopes.com/news/2017/03/01/dutch-earthquake-enth...
- DoreenMichele 3y ago
  Confirmation bias is a known human weakness. Based on what little I've seen, he does not appear to be guilty of it. If other people are overemphasizing his "correct" predictions and ignoring his incorrect ones, this should not be conflated with his position. He seems fairly reasonable at first glance.
  - gruez 3y ago
    >Confirmation bias is a known human weakness. Based on what little I've seen, he does not appear to be guilty of it. I scrolled through his timeline and found plenty of predictions that failed to materialize https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37446472 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37446472
    - DoreenMichele 3y ago
      I've only just learned of his existence. I have no idea why he would publish something like that. Perhaps it's part of his process for sorting out what works. I'm disinclined to draw any conclusion one way or another at this point in time about his work. I lack sufficient information and I'm confident quickly scanning his Twitter feed won't adequately fill in the gaps in my knowledge.
      - gruez 3y ago
        >Perhaps it's part of his process for sorting out what works. He's been doing this for years and has been going on the media circuit touting his predictions. He even works at (founded?) an organization that claims to predict earthquakes. This is obviously not a case of some scientist "sorting out what works".
        DoreenMichele 3y ago
        Coolios. I've just learned of his existence. I reserve the right to draw my own conclusions in my own time and do not feel compelled to cave to social pressure to spout the "party line". Thank you.
        gruez 3y ago
        >I reserve the right to draw my own conclusions in my own time and do not feel compelled to cave to social pressure to spout the "party line". What a bizarre statement to make after a seemingly reasonable series of exchanges. If you're out of arguments but don't want to change your mind, just admit so. Invoking some sort of persecution complex to justify it is just baffling. Nobody is demanding that you immediately change your mind or publicly recant your beliefs.
        DoreenMichele 3y ago
        What part of "I haven't made up my mind, I've only just learned he exists" are you failing to grasp?

by k_ 3y ago

That his research subject has not given "proper" scientific results yet (or ever) doesn't make him a fraud. We wouldn't go far if researchers could only research proven concepts.

hk__2 3y ago

> That his research subject has not given "proper" scientific results yet (or ever) doesn't make him a fraud. We wouldn't go far if researchers could only research proven concepts. The problem is we’re looking at the correct predictions only. He’s a broken clock, he "predicted" numerous earthquakes in various regions and only a small number ended up true. > The idea that planetary alignments can predict earthquakes has been long rebuffed by scientists. The USGS has stated that neither it nor any other scientist is able to predict a specific earthquake, but that it can calculate the probability of future temblors. Andrew Michael, a geophysicist for the agency, called alignment-based predictions "easy to refute" in a statement sent to Snopes. https://www.snopes.com/news/2017/03/01/dutch-earthquake-enthusiast-claims-to-predict-major-tremor/ https://www.snopes.com/news/2017/03/01/dutch-earthquake-enth...

DoreenMichele 3y ago
Confirmation bias is a known human weakness. Based on what little I've seen, he does not appear to be guilty of it. If other people are overemphasizing his "correct" predictions and ignoring his incorrect ones, this should not be conflated with his position. He seems fairly reasonable at first glance.
- gruez 3y ago
  >Confirmation bias is a known human weakness. Based on what little I've seen, he does not appear to be guilty of it. I scrolled through his timeline and found plenty of predictions that failed to materialize https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37446472 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37446472
  - DoreenMichele 3y ago
    I've only just learned of his existence. I have no idea why he would publish something like that. Perhaps it's part of his process for sorting out what works. I'm disinclined to draw any conclusion one way or another at this point in time about his work. I lack sufficient information and I'm confident quickly scanning his Twitter feed won't adequately fill in the gaps in my knowledge.
    - gruez 3y ago
      >Perhaps it's part of his process for sorting out what works. He's been doing this for years and has been going on the media circuit touting his predictions. He even works at (founded?) an organization that claims to predict earthquakes. This is obviously not a case of some scientist "sorting out what works".
      - DoreenMichele 3y ago
        Coolios. I've just learned of his existence. I reserve the right to draw my own conclusions in my own time and do not feel compelled to cave to social pressure to spout the "party line". Thank you.
        gruez 3y ago
        >I reserve the right to draw my own conclusions in my own time and do not feel compelled to cave to social pressure to spout the "party line". What a bizarre statement to make after a seemingly reasonable series of exchanges. If you're out of arguments but don't want to change your mind, just admit so. Invoking some sort of persecution complex to justify it is just baffling. Nobody is demanding that you immediately change your mind or publicly recant your beliefs.
        DoreenMichele 3y ago
        What part of "I haven't made up my mind, I've only just learned he exists" are you failing to grasp?