From the Random Blogroll
Lately I've been randomly clicking on random links in the random links. Then, randomly clicking on links in those random links.
Yeah. Anyway.... It's a great way to get your mind out of the A-list, and expand horizons (and BTW, the links here are awesome).
Here is something cool I read via Bouphonia,
who apprently does the same thing I was doing and a blog called Acephalous has this post: You don't need to know what the science means to establish what the words mean to scientists. Apparently a bunch of internal emails were hacked from the University of East Anglia's Climate Research Unit:
The problem with nonspecialists reading the private correspondence of experts is that their ignorance transforms all the technical points into nefarious inkblots. To continue with the example above, skeptical nonspecialists encounter the word "trick" and ask for clarification. Schmidt provides evidence that the word is innocuous, but because nonspecialists can interpret neither the context of the original nor that of the further examples, they redouble their efforts: now the rhetorical situation in which the word "trick" is uttered matters; now the appearance of quotation marks matters, etc. They are convincing themselves that those black blobs represent what they insist they represent, and when experts inform them that those are not Rorschach blots to be subjectively interpreted—that they are, in fact, statements written in a language that skeptics simply do not understand—the nonspecialists look over them again and declare that it could be a butterfly, or maybe a bat.
Needless to say, I don't envy climate scientists the tsunami of stupid they're about to suffer.