Post egregious examples of crap science reporting in this thread

[quarky]

Not to mention its combustibility. Wrecks with punctured tires would add some excitement.

Wow, my point rendered obsolete in a mere 15 seconds of slowness.

 

[CapelDodger]

Also, butane is flammable. a blowout could be really interesting if the tire gets hot enough, or there's a spark from static electricity or whatever.

At least all drivers nearby would know you'd had a blowout just as soon as you did and could take avoiding action. I don't profess to have thought this through thoroughly, you understand, but then neither did the nitrogen guy.

 

[CapelDodger]

Wow, my point rendered obsolete in a mere 15 seconds of slowness.

That's comedy for you - it's all in the timing .

 

[Jorghnassen]

See an example in this lonely thread I posted a couple of weeks ago.

 

[quarky]

Hey. Its not funny.

 

[Venom]

Any science article with "overturns" in the title should be considered suspect.

I just did a quick Google of "fossil" and "overturns." On the first page of results, I see that the scientific community's ideas about tyrannosaurs, Jurassic mammals, human ancestry, plant evolution, the human brain, and the age of life on earth have all been overturned within the last few years.

To be fair, a lot of paleontological studies have been overturned simply because studies on prehistoric mammals and dinosaurs are often done decades apart with scientists basing a lot of their work on previous scarce fossils.

For instance, scientists recently found that many well-known dinosaurs may have been a bit larger based on new extrapolation methods that focus on the fossils themselves.

 

[dasmiller]

To be fair, a lot of paleontological studies have been overturned simply because studies on prehistoric mammals and dinosaurs are often done decades apart with scientists basing a lot of their work on previous scarce fossils.

Fair enough

For instance, scientists recently found that many well-known dinosaurs may have been a bit larger based on new extrapolation methods that focus on the fossils themselves.

That example isn't working for me because "may have been a bit larger" doesn't sound like something I'd consider to be overturning. Consider a couple of headlines:

"New extrapolation technique overturns scientists' view of hadrosaurids!"

or

"New extrapolation technique indicates that hadrosaurids were a bit larger than previously thought."

I wouldn't consider them to be at all equivalent.

 

[Venom]

Fair enough



That example isn't working for me because "may have been a bit larger" doesn't sound like something I'd consider to be overturning. Consider a couple of headlines:

"New extrapolation technique overturns scientists' view of hadrosaurids!"

or

"New extrapolation technique indicates that hadrosaurids were a bit larger than previously thought."

I wouldn't consider them to be at all equivalent.

Two examples I can think off the top of my head are:

"Dinosaurs taller than previously thought"

and

"Tyrannosaurus rex would have been much heavier than originally thought, researchers say"

 

[phildonnia]

Not really science "reporting", but my kid's science book explains:

Earth Spins as it orbits around the sun.
When Earth is facing the sun, it is day.
The sun shines on Earth during the day, so it is light.
When Earth is facing away from the sun, it is night.
The sun doesn't shine on Earth at night, so it is dark.

 

[John Albert]

http://www.geekologie.com/2011/07/lol-weekend-weather-neared-boiling-point.php

To be fair, they never specified exactly which boiling point they're talking about. They might have meant the boiling point of naphtha.

 

[Robrob]

Not really science "reporting", but my kid's science book explains:

Earth Spins as it orbits around the sun.
When Earth is facing the sun, it is day.
The sun shines on Earth during the day, so it is light.
When Earth is facing away from the sun, it is night.
The sun doesn't shine on Earth at night, so it is dark.

Possibly more egregious misuse of the English language than purely scientific illiteracy?

"When your side of the Earth is facing the Sun, etc..."

 

[Gazpacho]

Scientists are about to find "The Force"

This so-called "science writer" from Gizmodo references a decent article in National Geographic, but tosses out all of the good, reliable information presented there in favor of latching on to this single goofy analogy:

A little twisting of scientific accuracy to avoid mentioning midichlorians is a-ok with me.

 

[WhatRoughBeast]

What a joke- they give the men two choices, do they identify more with a rapist or a misogynist men's magazine. They're not able to qualify how much they identify with either, if at all, only which one they identify with more. They then draw negative conclusions about the men from the results of this rigged game. What a load of rubbish.

Heh. Then again, several years ago there was a quiz on the internet, the point of which was to distinguish between quotes from the UNABOMBER manifesto and Al Gore's "An Inconvenient Truth".

I got just about 50% right.

Draw your own conclusions.

 

[CapelDodger]

Heh. Then again, several years ago there was a quiz on the internet, the point of which was to distinguish between quotes from the UNABOMBER manifesto and Al Gore's "An Inconvenient Truth".

I got just about 50% right.

Draw your own conclusions.

http://www.crm114.com/algore/quiz.html presumably?

There's nothing particularly odd in any of the statements, so no conclusions can be drawn from this selection. Al Gore and the Unabomber were both born with one penis and two parents : what conclusions can be drawn from that?

No doubt someone's done the same exercise using Mein Kampf instead of the Unabomber, given how many people seem to have a major issue with Al Gore. For me he's just a failed US American politician.

 

[John Albert]

The quotes from both the rapists and the mens magazine writers (like the quotes from Al Gore/Ted Kaczynski, and Qadaffi/Charlie Sheen) were specifically cherry-picked to appear similar, with the intention of confusing the test subjects and thereby ensuring the hasty generalization that mens' magazine writers generally talk like rapists.

I'm sure some they could have chosen some far more misogynistic quotes from the rapists, and more innocuous quotes from the men's magazine writers. But choosing the quotes that way would not have produced the desired effect of the test subjects being unable to differentiate between the two groups.

The whole study was based on cherry-picked quotes intended to evoke a desired emotional response. Therefore, the outcome was intentionally skewed by a deliberate selection of test material.

 

[quarky]

Is the fusion reactor still 'right around the corner'?

Its 'inevitability' has likely contributed to a laxness on the part of other innovations.

 

[CapelDodger]

Is the fusion reactor still 'right around the corner'?

It's still fifty years away. It's good to know there are some things we can depend on in life.

Such a waste of time and effort (the fusion reactor, I mean, not life. Although, come to think of it ...).