[FRIAM] Today's meeting

All - Frank and I will be a bit late this morning, but we are coming. Should be safely there by 9.45. N Nicholas S. Thompson Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology Clark University http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/ http://www.cusf.org

Re: [FRIAM] Fwd: [New post] The Loud and Clear Message that the TED Controversy is Sending

But they do promise life everlasting. On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 11:03 PM, Nicholas Thompson < nickthomp...@earthlink.net> wrote: > Again, acting in my capacity as the Village Pragmatist, I would assert that > science is the only procedure capable of producing lasting consensus. The > other methods

[FRIAM] good news about apple

I'm sure you Apple fans have heard this news, already. Apple's iMessage encryption trips up feds' surveillance http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-57577887-38/apples-imessage-encryption-trips-up-feds-surveillance/ -- glen e. p. ropella, 971-255-2847, http://tempusdictum.com Whoever fights monster

Re: [FRIAM] Fwd: [New post] The Loud and Clear Message that the TED Controversy is Sending

Nicholas Thompson wrote at 04/04/2013 10:03 PM: > Again, acting in my capacity as the Village Pragmatist, I would assert that > science is the only procedure capable of producing lasting consensus. The > other methods various forms of torture, mostly ... do not produce such > enduring results

Re: [FRIAM] Fwd: [New post] The Loud and Clear Message that the TED Controversy is Sending

+1 On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 7:41 PM, Steve Smith wrote: > > Just one small teensy note of clarification: I usually only insult > people who disagree with me when they are/have been complete assholes about > it. Which fortunately narrows the field down a bit. > > -Doug > > I can testify to this,

Re: [FRIAM] Fwd: [New post] The Loud and Clear Message that the TED Controversy is Sending

And given exponential growth in science, who knows first hand what the variance in accepted scientific evidence actually is? Any claims to know what science "is" and what scientists "do", for the purposes of distinguishing between science and non-science, are claims to a revealed truth, not someth

Re: [FRIAM] Fwd: [New post] The Loud and Clear Message that the TED Controversy is Sending

Roger Critchlow wrote at 04/05/2013 08:23 AM: > And given exponential growth in science, who knows first hand what the > variance in accepted scientific evidence actually is? That's a great point. It may help me articulate my objection to the concept of "the singularity", the sense that technol

[FRIAM] just the facts

From Abortion, Climate Change, Gun Control to Social Security and Taxes, the http://www.justfacts.com/ offers just the [distilled] facts on about 14 major topics. I thought this site with its emphasis on objectivity might perhaps be useful to the group. The sister (brother|sibling) site http:

Re: [FRIAM] Fwd: [New post] The Loud and Clear Message that the TED Controversy is Sending

Roger/Glen - Good stuff... I find both topics very compelling: 1. How do we define/recognize valid measures of evidence? 2. Is the current "exponential" growth in tech divergent or convergent? 1. I have worked on several projects involving the formal management of evidence and belief which m

Re: [FRIAM] Fwd: [New post] The Loud and Clear Message that the TED Controversy is Sending

On Fri, Apr 5, 2013 at 11:54 AM, Steve Smith wrote: > Roger/Glen - > > Good stuff... I find both topics very compelling: > > >1. How do we define/recognize valid measures of evidence? > > In the case of the chemtrail faithful I can safely characterize their measure (singular) of evidence as:

[FRIAM] Thanks for All the Fish!

Doug - 1. How do we define/recognize valid measures of evidence? In the case of the chemtrail faithful I can safely characterize their measure (singular) of evidence as: "Look! See the chemtrails? 'They' are trying to poison us!!!" No argument there but *why* are they trying to poison us!!

Re: [FRIAM] Thanks for All the Fish!

I think I'm always channeling Douglas Adams. Thanks for asking. --Doug On Fri, Apr 5, 2013 at 12:25 PM, Steve Smith wrote: > Doug - > >1. How do we define/recognize valid measures of evidence? > > In the case of the chemtrail faithful I can safely characterize their > measure (singular)

Re: [FRIAM] just the facts

That looked cool. I was particularily interested in what they said about gun control( http://www.justfacts.com/guncontrol.asp ). I went to the source of their information and it was totally different from what they reported. They attribute the data to the source *[120] Dataset: "20 Leading Causes

Re: [FRIAM] just the facts

Lying with statistics, I don't think that firearm homicide or firearm suicide (the categories in the second table) count as firearm accidental deaths (the category in the first graph). -- rec -- On Fri, Apr 5, 2013 at 12:45 PM, cody dooderson wrote: > That looked cool. I was particularily inte

Re: [FRIAM] Fwd: [New post] The Loud and Clear Message that the TED Controversy is Sending

Steve Smith wrote at 04/05/2013 10:54 AM: > 1. How do we define/recognize valid measures of evidence? > 2. Is the current "exponential" growth in tech divergent or convergent? > > 1. I have worked on several projects involving the formal management of > evidence and belief which makes me cy

Re: [FRIAM] just the facts

On 4/5/13 11:34 AM, Robert J. Cordingley wrote: From Abortion, Climate Change, Gun Control to Social Security and Taxes, the http://www.justfacts.com/ offers just the [distilled] facts on about 14 major topics. I thought this site with its emphasis on objectivity might perhaps be useful to the

Re: [FRIAM] Fwd: [New post] The Loud and Clear Message that the TED Controversy is Sending

Well, you may all soon tire of my attempt to channel the classical pragmatist, C.S Peirce, but it is an interesting perspective, one that has had broad influence on our thought, but whose foundations have gotten trampled into the intellectual midden in the last 100 years, and therefore, I think, wo

Re: [FRIAM] just the facts

I also spent 15 minutes or so perusing some of the more politically polarizing topics, and it didn't take long to realize the site tilts pretty heavily toward the right. It's easy to cherry pick just the facts that support one's own position. Does anyone have suggestions for a site that actually

Re: [FRIAM] Fwd: [New post] The Loud and Clear Message that the TED Controversy is Sending

Roger, Speaking in my role as the Village Pragmatist, I think I would insist that your implication is incorrect that there is no purchase on the slipperly slope you describe. Your despair is premature. From: Friam [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] On Behalf Of Roger Critchlow Sent: Fri

Re: [FRIAM] Fwd: [New post] The Loud and Clear Message that the TED Controversy is Sending

Glen - Steve Smith wrote at 04/05/2013 10:54 AM: 1. How do we define/recognize valid measures of evidence? 2. Is the current "exponential" growth in tech divergent or convergent? ... Well, the first thing to cover is that the definition won't necessarily be pre-statable. In order for it

[FRIAM] Fwd: Re: The nature of Discussion Fora

Glen, et al - Here is a response from a friend/colleague (some of you knew him when he was at BIOS) who attempted to CC FRIAM and I'm sure it bounced as he is not a subscriber. - Steve Original Message Subject:Re: [FRIAM] The nature of Discussion Fora Date: Fri,

Re: [FRIAM] just the facts

I don't think Democracy! Now purports to be 'just the facts' - while of course they wouldn't say they *distort* the truth, mostly they are devoted to news and interviews about left-leaning topics, or civil/humanitarian rights in general. Fox News, on the other hand, is equally focussed on conservat

Re: [FRIAM] Fwd: [New post] The Loud and Clear Message that the TED Controversy is Sending

It think the Village Pragmatist would insist, contra Roger, that even as there is an explosion of small doubts at the periphery of our collective understanding, so also there is an explosion of the stuff that we have come to agree about. Nick -Original Message- From: Friam [mailto:fria

Re: [FRIAM] just the facts

Take your own data. Excellent suggestion! For some reason, it made me remember this site. The Centre for Investigative Journalism http://www.tcij.org/ I think there is a middle ground between the sensationalism of our infotainment outlets and the often daunting task of gathering our own

Re: [FRIAM] just the facts

Arlo - I don't think Democracy! Now purports to be 'just the facts' - while of course they wouldn't say they /distort/ the truth, mostly they are devoted to news and interviews about left-leaning topics, or civil/humanitarian rights in general. Fox News, on the other hand, is equally focusse

Re: [FRIAM] just the facts

It is understandable that many people can't believe that we puny humans could possibly have a big impact on the environment. My parents used to refer with reverence and awe to "the inexhaustible sea".. Bruce FRIAM Applied Complexity

Re: [FRIAM] just the facts

Glen - Take your own data. Excellent suggestion! For some reason, it made me remember this site. The Centre for Investigative Journalism http://www.tcij.org/ Our own Tom Johnson! No, that is: http://www.analyticjournalism.com/ ... My own holy grail is *context*. I appreciate point

Re: [FRIAM] just the facts

On 4/5/13 2:45 PM, Bruce Sherwood wrote: It is understandable that many people can't believe that we puny humans could possibly have a big impact on the environment. My parents used to refer with reverence and awe to "the inexhaustible sea".. My favorite example is the line (paraphrased) fro

Re: [FRIAM] just the facts

This website pisses me off every time i try to check their sources. Why did they even put sources in if they were going to blatantly lie about what they contain. Their caption reads "* The following pictures are of U.S. submarines surfacing at the North Pole in March of 1959 and August of 1962:" N

Re: [FRIAM] just the facts

Oh no, someone is wrong on the internet! -- rec -- On Fri, Apr 5, 2013 at 3:56 PM, cody dooderson wrote: > This website pisses me off every time i try to check their sources. Why > did they even put sources in if they were going to blatantly lie about what > they contain. > > Their caption rea

Re: [FRIAM] just the facts

good point On Fri, Apr 5, 2013 at 4:01 PM, Roger Critchlow wrote: > Oh no, someone is wrong on the internet! > > -- rec -- > > > On Fri, Apr 5, 2013 at 3:56 PM, cody dooderson wrote: > >> This website pisses me off every time i try to check their sources. Why >> did they even put sources in if

Re: [FRIAM] just the facts

So is the consensus that justfacts.com is perhaps not just wrong but misleading and deliberately deceptive while claiming not to be so at the same time? We really need unbiased investigative journalism. Does the Cente

Re: [FRIAM] just the facts

Democracy Now - PBS TV 9.1 - on now (4/5/13 5:30pm) ! Just talked to the author Robert W. McChesney of Digital Disconnect about problems with journalism. Coincidence? -- Robert C On 4/5/13 4:30 PM, Robert

Re: [FRIAM] just the facts

Robert - > The thing is, the [honorable] idea behind justfacts.com is a good one. Yup, *I* wanted to believe in them... if you hadn't prompted me by warning us there was a parallel blog *with* an agenda, I might have swallowed more of their hogwash (until Cody, "the Dood") shared his own fol

Re: [FRIAM] Fwd: [New post] The Loud and Clear Message that the TED Controversy is Sending

Unfortunately I think I am coming into this a bit too late to read through the whole thread and respond, but I would like to present a couple of related topics and see what people think. The first is in response to 'would I like people to burst my placebo/nocebo bubble?': the latest issue of Scien

Re: [FRIAM] Fwd: [New post] The Loud and Clear Message that the TED Controversy is Sending

prescience: piles of random woo science: linear woo woo trains unity: fractal woos within woos = WOO ! Rich On Fri, Apr 5, 2013 at 8:42 PM, Arlo Barnes wrote: > Unfortunately I think I am coming into this a bit too late to read through > the whole thread and respond, but I would like to pre

Re: [FRIAM] Fwd: [New post] The Loud and Clear Message that the TED Controversy is Sending

Compare Urban Dictionary: woot . -Arlo James Barnes FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailma

Re: [FRIAM] Fwd: [New post] The Loud and Clear Message that the TED Controversy is Sending

Urban Dictionary: woot . woot Share on twitter Share on facebook Share on more *

Re: [FRIAM] Fwd: [New post] The Loud and Clear Message that the TED Controversy is Sending

I thought woo was a FRIAM local-ism for the Santa Fe local-ism woo woo now in urban usage: http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=woo+woo Dean Gerber From: Rich Murray To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group Sent: Friday, April 5, 20

Re: [FRIAM] Fwd: [New post] The Loud and Clear Message that the TED Controversy is Sending

1. woo woo Share on twitter Share on facebook Share on more *253* up

Re: [FRIAM] Cloud storage

All the plans I use are free. They range from 2GB to (I think) 25 GB for Microsoft! Everything in the designated directories are backed up automatically. *-- Russ Abbott* *_* *** Professor, Computer Science* * California State University, Los Angeles*