Done. ng,ng.

Done

Done

What is your favorite Neil deGrasse Tyson quote?

start

ding

back to NYE

"The beuatiful thing about science is that it is true, whether you belive in it or not"

Ïgnorance is a virus"

done

ah, nice n easy

MrOoijer
"The beuatiful thing about science is that it is true, whether you belive in it or not" -------- "Until what was previous unknown is discovered then there is a new truth and crow to eat about what is now false..."

Science is highly relevant to the known universe (aka: the set of data points that are known)

“Thursday the 12th” is just as rare as “Friday the 13th”.

Roughly, 1 in every 7 13th day of the month is Fridays.

Or on average once every 7 months there is a Friday the 13th. Of course it doesn't work out quite that neat because not every month has the same number of days and likewise for years (leap year).

If you have nothing better to do, you could examine the calendars for the next 400 years and count up the Friday the 13th to see if I am right. After 400 years the calendars start repeating, so the calendar for 2418 will be the same as this year's calendar except for the year.

easy one today - Happy new year to all sudokuers !

@MrOoijer, if you are trying to tell us about your favorite Neil deGrasse Tyson quote you might at least get it right: "The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it."
Your version was: "The beuatiful thing about science is that it is true, whether you belive in it or not."
It's all bunk anyway. The inescapable fact about science is this: Not all of our current science is true.
Further, some of the science we currently have wrong will come back to bite us later.
It's time we started learning from experience, from history, and not blindly following the current Prince Charming of science modified for the media.

In that case, Dr Who, I should save my calendars. In 400 years, somebody else can use them again.

An Easy turned into a fast clicker. 9.

@dr who - dont count fridays the 13th - thousands of math students have done that before you - the probablity is slightly above 1:7

@ TallMike so what is the essential difference between my version and yours? And what is your source? Mine is just what I remebered - I do not think that my version misreporesents what he said or wrote or whatever. In any case he is hardly well known outside of the US. In the Netherlands our famous science guy is Robbert Dijkgraaf, the Dutch director and Leon Levy professor at the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton.

@ TallMike Then you say: "It's all bunk anyway". That's your opinion. Do you have facts? Science is about facts.

"Not all of our current science is true." Sure. If you think Diederik Stapel belonged to science, I tend to agree, because I was one of the persons who discovered his data fraud. Personally I do not think Social Psychology is science.

So little details migh "not be true"-- ie wrong. Like Brian Wansink. But give an example of real scientific theories that are wrong. There are none, whether you like that or not.

@TallMike, finally - you again talk about "US"- if you are trying to tell us about ...""

A couple of days ago I commented about this use of Us or WE, but you never replied to that. If you want a discussion why coward away from that point?

done

Will wait (likely forever) for examples of science being proven wrong. *Real* science, not fake science. Tick tock, tick tock.

@MrOoijer, tuco asked: What is your favorite Neil deGrasse Tyson quote? You had a choice about how to answer, either verbatim or by approximation. Your response was in quotes, also called quotation marks, incorrectly indicating a verbatim quote. The version I quoted was verified from multiple Internet sources (please check for yourself), while yours is an inaccurate recollection which an Internet search will correct many times and never once verify.

You appear to be pleading that there is no "essential" difference between the widely recognized version of the quote and your lone alternative wording. "Essentially" you have therefore admitted that there is at least some difference between the two versions. In my opinion, there is a huge difference between saying "The good thing about science..." and "The beautiful thing about science..." because the word "good" is a trigger word which reminds the reader or listener of the expressions "good science" and "bad science." I believe Tyson intentionally used the word good in order to imply that all science is good science.

@MrOoijer, you have challenged me to give an example of real scientific theories that are wrong. That obviously cannot be done because once a theory is proven wrong it is discarded or modified. However, the mere fact that the number of discarded or modified theories continues to grow clearly demonstrates that some of our current theories will later be shown to be wrong. The alternative would be that we have suddenly arrived at a full, complete and perfect knowledge and understanding of the contents of our universe including all the processes and dependencies at all scales of magnitude - and I don't believe there is any sign of that having happened.

@MrOoijer, some of us learned in school about classic scientific theories of the past which were later proved incorrect. They include phlogiston (from 1667), aether (the 1700s) phrenology (the 1800s), and the still widely taught "fact" that light travels in straight lines except when refracted.