June 2011
May 2011
Killing Floor Tutorial
1./ Kill the Bad things
2./ Get money for killing bad things
3./ When all the bad things are dead spend money on better and bigger guns to kill the bad things more efficiently
4./ Survive
Things that don't make sense...
Name one?
“Men never commit evil so fully and joyfully as when they do it for religious convictions”
—Blaise Pascal (via abaldwin360)
“The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool.”
—Richard Feynman (American theoretical physicist, 1918-1988)
Some more people that keep my dashboard interesting...
more recommendations later...
Some people that keep my dashboard interesting...
"Si el amor es la Guerra, no quiero paz"
Trent Reznor - Immigrant Song (ft. Karen O) - Minus →
min.us
Download link.
Don’t ever say I don’t take care of you
(not the best quality but it’s something)
Listen
Rolling Stones - Love Is Strong
Good morning people! Wake up and smell the Napalm.
Oh tumblr...
I had to add two more things to my dashboard blacklist
“reblog if…”
and
“Only 3% would reblog this and pray for a cure”
One of my absolute favorite blogs. You just "wasted" a couple of my hours :D
Thank you mysterious stranger
Carl Sagan's "Skeptical Thinker's Toolbox"
The following is an excerpt from Sagan’s book “Demon Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark” on tools for skeptical thinking.
Where ever possible there must be independent confirmation of the “facts.”
Encourage substantive debate on the evidence by knowledgeable proponents of all points of view.
Arguments from authority carry little weight- “authorities” have made mistakes in the past. They will do so again in the future. Perhaps a better way to say it is that in science there are no authorities; at most, there are experts.
Spin more than one hypothesis. If there’s something to be explained, think of all the different ways in which it could be explained. Then think of tests by which you might systematically disprove each of the alternatives. What survives, the hypothesis that resists disproof in this Darwinian selection among “multiple working hypotheses,” has a much better chance of being the right answer than if you had simply run with the first idea that caught your fancy.
Try not to get overly attached to a hypothesis just because it’s yours. It’s only a way station in the pursuit of knowledge. Ask yourself why you like the idea. Compare it fairly with the alternatives. See if you can find reasons for rejecting it. If you don’t, others will.
Quantify. If whatever you’re explaining has some measure, some numerical quantity attached to it, you’ll be much better able to discriminate among competing hypotheses. What is vague and qualitative is open to many explanations. Of course there are truths to be sought in the many qualitative issues we are obliged to confront, but finding them is more challenging.
If there’s a chain of argument, every link in the chain must work (including the premise)- not just most of them.
Occam’s Razor. This convenient rule-of-thumb urges us when faced with two hypotheses that explain the data equally well to choose the simpler.
Always ask whether the hypothesis can be, at least in principle, falsified. Propositions that are untestable, unfalsifiable are not worth much. Consider the grand idea that our Universe and everything in it is just an elementary particle- an electron say- in a much bigger Cosmos. But if we can never acquire information from outside our Universe, is not the idea incapable of disproof? You must be able to check assertions out. Inveterate skeptics must be given the chance to follow your reasoning, to duplicate your experiments and see if they get the same result.
