3 ms·
> Because, apparently, a consistent trend of 100 consecutive falsifications implies nothing about the likelihood of #101. And at the end of the day, it's imposs
by hnfong 6mo ago
> Because, apparently, a consistent trend of 100 consecutive falsifications implies nothing about the likelihood of #101. And at the end of the day, it's impossible to conclusively prove a negative.
That's right. Not sure why you sound a bit unhappy with this.
In particular, a source can become more untrustworthy over time if the source is repeatedly proven to lie or be reckless about the truth. I'm not sure you can apply the same logic to "categories of claims". What is the rationale behind your implied frustration that people are not "learning" that some "categories of claims" tend to be untrue? (not to mention the arbitrary grouping of totally disparate ones like Chem-Trails and Flat Earth)
- foltik 6mo agoIf a “category of claims” has shared causal structure, then the category’s track record absolutely does tell you something about the next claim in it. It’s not arbitrary. Alien UFOs, Chem-Trails, and Flat Earth are obviously all generated from the same distribution of bullshit: ambiguous or misunderstood phenomena explained by positing a vast hidden conspiracy.
- cubefox 6mo agoWhat about Avi Loeb's theory that 'Oumuamua is an UFO with a solar sail, which would explain its apparently unusually flat pancake-like shape?
- tsimionescu 6mo agoThat's an example of ambiguous or misunderstood phenomena explained by a professor who decided that there's more money in UFO BS than in his previous career (or sincerely lost his grip on reality, who knows).
- cubefox 6mo agoI don't know, he seems to be really smart. Maybe it's a good UFO theory for a change.
- blincoln 6mo agoIt was an interesting thoery, but IMO his habit of making similar claims every time an interstellar object is discovered cast doubt on that original theory.
- cubefox 6mo agoI'm not aware of any similar claims. I thought the other two interstellar objects were not anomalous.
- matt_kantor 6mo agoYou can read a summary on his Wikipedia article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avi_Loeb#Claims_about_alien_life https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avi_Loeb#Claims_about_alien_li...
- cubefox 5mo agoI note that article seems quite biased against Loeb. For example, they cite USA Today strongly criticizing him, which is not a reputable source in this debate. Wikipedia also doesn't mention that many other astrophysicists think that his 'Oumuamua theory is unlikely but not crazy. They only cite very negative criticism, but not the many more neutral responses. They also don't mention that he is far from the only one believing that 'Oumuamua appears to have a highly unusual shape. Wikipedia tries to paint him in the worst light possible.
- matt_kantor 5mo agoI've got no horse in this race, but the great thing about Wikipedia is that you can edit the article[0] to fix anything that you feel is incorrect and/or not adhering to the encyclopedia's policies. You could also bring up your concerns on the talk page[1]. [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Avi_Loeb&action=edit https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Avi_Loeb&action=e... [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Avi_Loeb https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Avi_Loeb
- marshray 6mo agoEvery person on Earth could agree that Earth is flat and it wouldn't affect the reality of whether or not extraterrestrials visit earth even a little bit.
- rapnie 6mo agoThe shared causal structure is the absence of facts and denial of science. Nearly every religion on earth also suffers from that in their gospel, where many fictitious and supernatural phenomena are bundled together and sold for truth.
- hnfong 6mo agoThere is nothing anti-science about the idea of extraterrestrial intelligence. In fact its apparent absence is has a name -- it's called the Fermi Paradox. And the facts are just ... released. It's the interpretation of the observations that are disputed. And unless you think they are all fake, the explanations that do not involve alien tech are non-trivial to say the least. I'm not sure why you'd think there is any shared causal structure with flat earthers at all.
- quickthrowman 6mo agoExtraterrestrial intelligence existing somewhere in the universe, and extraterrestrial life visiting Earth are two distinct things, and the former is vastly more probable than the latter.
- rapnie 6mo agoYes, and to bring it back to GP's point, if someone comes telling you they just saw a flying saucer rise on a big chem trail above the flat earth's horizon, then you perhaps don't take their next claim all too serious.
- cubefox 5mo agoYou are assuming that the people who are arguing about "transients", or people like Avi Loeb, are also people who believe in flat earth or flying saucers.