Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
What are you supposed to do when the data does not validate your hypothesis:
a. Get a new hypothesis
b. adjust the data to match you hypothesis?
What are you supposed to do when the data does not validate your hypothesis:
a. Get a new hypothesis
b. adjust the data to match you hypothesis?
frank...what the hell are you going on about?
you repeat the experiment...with the same variables....and see if the results are the same....science is not based on one try
I hope.... You been mugged by Kellogs or something? Did Mattel beat you as child? Maybe Fed Ex is blocking your road to life? What's the deal with this fixation?Yet you swallow whole whatever the corporations tell you as if they dont have a dime at stake.
What are you supposed to do when the data does not validate your hypothesis:
a. Get a new hypothesis
b. adjust the data to match you hypothesis?
frank...what the hell are you going on about?
you repeat the experiment...with the same variables....and see if the results are the same....science is not based on one try
You forgot the little sarcasm dealy-bopper.. like
TruthMatters:
You been mugged by Kellogs or something? Did Mattel beat you as child? Maybe Fed Ex is blocking your road to life? What's the deal with this fixation?Yet you swallow whole whatever the corporations tell you as if they dont have a dime at stake.
What are you supposed to do when the data does not validate your hypothesis:
a. Get a new hypothesis
b. adjust the data to match you hypothesis?
You mean like the creationists and AGW deniers do?
What are you supposed to do when the data does not validate your hypothesis:
a. Get a new hypothesis
b. adjust the data to match you hypothesis?
What are you supposed to do when the data does not validate your hypothesis:
a. Get a new hypothesis
b. adjust the data to match you hypothesis?
What are you supposed to do when the data does not validate your hypothesis:
a. Get a new hypothesis
b. adjust the data to match you hypothesis?
We are talking about the economy?
Tax cuts creating jobs?
Proof of god?
What are you supposed to do when the data does not validate your hypothesis:
a. Get a new hypothesis
b. adjust the data to match you hypothesis?
We are talking about the economy?
Tax cuts creating jobs?
Proof of god?
The Total Failure of Keynesian Economic Theory comes to mind
AGW skeptics don't have any hypothesis...They just question those of the cultist scaremongers.What are you supposed to do when the data does not validate your hypothesis:
a. Get a new hypothesis
b. adjust the data to match you hypothesis?
You mean like the creationists and AGW deniers do?
AGW skeptics don't have any hypothesis...They just question those of the cultist scaremongers.What are you supposed to do when the data does not validate your hypothesis:
a. Get a new hypothesis
b. adjust the data to match you hypothesis?
You mean like the creationists and AGW deniers do?
Such a shame that the "question authority" crowd of the '60s and beyond has become the appeal to authority gang of today.
When it comes to depending on scientific findings and using the data to justify establishing guilt on an "enemy" in order to attack them and justify wars, and occupation, and a change in foreign policy involving HUGE expenditures, to the extent that even the use of torture is justifiable with the help of the "scientific" findings, you simply choose B, and make the data fit the hypothesis that all of this depends on.What are you supposed to do when the data does not validate your hypothesis:
a. Get a new hypothesis
b. adjust the data to match you hypothesis?
We are talking about the economy?
Tax cuts creating jobs?
Proof of god?
Can I gets a $1,000,000 gubmint grant to have a crack team of college professor navel gazers flesh out the implications of both them possibilities?
Without authorization, for instance, the feds spent $19.6 million annually on the International Fund for Ireland. Sounds like a noble cause, but the money went for projects like pony-trekking centers and golf videos.
Congressional budget-cutters spared the $440,000 spent annually to have attendants push buttons on the fully automated Capitol Hill elevators used by Representatives and Senators.
Last year, the National Endowment for the Humanities spent $4.2 million to conduct a nebulous National Conversation on Pluralism and Identity. Obviously, talk radio wasnt considered good enough.
The Pentagon and Central Intelligence Agency channeled some $11 million to psychics who might provide special insights about various foreign threats. This was the disappointing Stargate program.
The Department of Education spent $34 million supposedly helping Americans become better shoppers and homemakers. Wasnt it about time?
The federal government proposed spending $14 million for a new Army Museum, although there already were 47 Army Museums around the country. We helped stop that idea.
Dubious government spending schemes abound since bureaucrats play with other peoples money. For example, the National Institutes of Mental Health (NIMH) spent $70,029 to see if the degu, a diurnal South American rodent, can help us better understand jet lag . . . they spent $77,826 to study Coping with Change in Czechoslovakia . . . $100,271 to see if volunteering is good for older people . . . $124,910 to reduce School Phobia in children . . . $161,913 to study Israeli reactions to SCUD Attacks during the Gulf War . . . and $187,042 to study the quality of life in Hawaii.
Over the years, political wrangling twists the most noble-sounding government programs beyond recognition. For example, the Social Security Administrations $25 billion a year Supplemental Security Income (SSI) program. Almost 250,000 children qualify for SSI checks because they cant participate in age appropriate activities. Worse, thousands of prisoners get SSI checks relating to their alleged disabilitiescosting taxpayers about $20 million a year.
Thats not all. In Denver, the government reportedly sent $160,000 to recipients at their official addressa tavern. A San Francisco addict used his SSI check to buy drugs, which he subsequently sold on the street for a profit. A Van Nuys, California, alcoholic received a $26,000 SSI check, then spent the money on a van and two cars which he subsequently wrecked while driving drunk. Los Angeles SSI recipients reportedly faked mental illness and had a doctor concoct false medical records, so they could pocket $45,000 worth of checks. An estimated 79,000 alcoholics and drug addicts are believed to spend SSI checkssome $360 million annuallyon their habits.
Again and again, programs aimed at the poor are captured by well-heeled interest groups. For example, the Commerce Departments U.S. Travel and Tourism Administration (USTTA) gave away $440,000 in so-called disaster relief to Western ski resort operators when there wasnt much snow.
Most Outrageous Government Waste | The Freeman | Ideas On Liberty
