When is a Breakthrough not a Breakthrough

Posted on December 18, 2022 by Tom Liberman

I’m a bit of a buff when it comes to nuclear energy and a recent story racing through the internet involves a breakthrough in Nuclear Fusion.

I’m not going to get into a highly technical discussion about Nuclear Fusion or even the details of this particularly breakthrough. If you want to know more then please click the link above for a thorough and excellent article discussing the breakthrough and the challenges that lie ahead.

Free Energy

In this situation the headlines blared about an important breakthrough in nuclear fusion that promised endless and almost free energy. This is a concept I’ve talked about before. The possibility of such a thing is tantalizing and the effects on our world all but incalculable.

The Breakthrough that Isn’t

The problem with the blaring headlines and ridiculous promises engendered by them is it really isn’t the breakthrough people imagine. Yes, it’s an important breakthrough on the way to potentially using controlled nuclear fusion to generate energy. The problem is it’s nowhere near what is necessary to provide energy. Much more energy was used to create the nuclear fusion than was generated by it.

This is a problem with misleading headlines. A regular feature of mine that I’ve let slip the last couple of years. In any case, this story is not what people imagine and that’s the problem.

In this case the misleading headline is technically true but practically false. Again, for a full discussion of why this is the case, click the link provided.

Ramifications

Now I get to the point of this blog. What are the ramifications of publishing information about a breakthrough when many people will completely misunderstand the issue? Is it a dire situation? Not really. Most people will misunderstand the breakthrough but there is largely no practical problem with this confusion.

Controlled nuclear fusion is not coming anytime soon, if ever and no headline or personal belief on the matter will change that.

However, there is great potential for harm. Let’s imagine some fast-talking con-artist out there who wants your money and promises to make a fantastic, easy to build, nuclear fusion reactor. Lots of people give money to that person who spends a few years spouting out false promises only to fail to deliver in the end. What if that fast-talking con-artist manages to convince people in government; local, state, and federal, to give her or him a huge amount of tax-payer funds? What if that person becomes the richest person in the world or just merely a billionaire?

I think you see the problem. Con-artists love this sort of story in the same way they love conspiracy theories. It gets people excited and thinking irrationally. A fool and his or her money, as the saying goes.

What to Do?

My solution is almost always the same. Teach critical thinking skills at every level of education starting in preschool. If you’ve spent time watching science videos about nuclear fusion then you’ll be skeptical the moment you see the breakthrough headline. You’ll immediately seek out other sources to confirm it and you won’t be taken in by Theranos, I mean a con-artist.

Conclusion

If something looks too good to be true, it is. I’m not the first to say as much.

Tom Liberman

The Stereotype in Religious Beliefs Article

Posted on May 14, 2022 by Tom Liberman

I just read a moderately interesting article about how atheists, agnostics, and Christians are stereotyped in regards to their religious beliefs. The article pretty much confirms anything you’d suspect. Most people stereotype others based on their religious beliefs or lack thereof. That’s not what I’m going to be writing about today.

I want to discuss the extensive comments thread on the article. Now, I didn’t peruse all 1,322 comments on the article but I did scroll down far enough to get a general impression. No one discussed the actual article. People certainly had strong opinions on the religious beliefs of one another and things get quite political at times. As to the study? Nada.

What was the Study?

The study was pretty simple in design. Do people stereotype atheists, agnostics, and Christians differently? The premise being that, generally speaking, people think atheists are more likely to behave in a morally deficient manner. The big difference in this study is that it separated atheists and agnostics rather than grouping them together.

The results were exactly as predicted. Atheists were considered the most likely to behave immorally, followed by agnostics, with Christians being viewed as the least likely to engage in amoral practices.

Exactly what the study expected to find. The authors did some interesting things with the those who filled out the questionnaires by sometimes defining atheism and agnosticism and other times allowing the users to give their opinion without the definitions.

The Results of the Study on Religious Beliefs

To my, atheist mind, it’s a predictable result. It’s exactly what I’d expect. No big deal, study confirms the stereotypes exist and play out pretty much in a standard way.

The Comments

Ah, now we get to the interesting part of the article. The comments. After reading the article, I planned to comment my thoughts that the results pretty much matched expectations of the stereotypes of religious beliefs. No one else seemed to be on the same wavelength.

Not that people didn’t anticipate the results, they just filled the comment sections with more study fodder. Basically, everyone spent their time talking about moral expectations of people based on their religion and political views. I saw much back and forth on the actual definition of atheism and agnosticism. This of course, is exactly what the study was not about.

The study wasn’t about the actual morality of atheists, agnostics, and Christians. It was about stereotypes others have of those group in regard to their likely moral behavior.

It seems no one actually read the article, big surprise there. The atheists, agnostics, and Christians simply listed out their stereotypes of one another and argued about it. I found this humorous. I suspect you, valued readers, are less amused than I.

Conclusion

They needn’t have done the study at all. Just pretend to do the study and post the article. The comment section tells the rest of the story.

Tom Liberman

The Four-Legged Snake Misleading Headline

Posted on November 27, 2021 by Tom Liberman

I’ve been reading mostly science articles of late and one about a four-legged snake caught my eyes. The headline reads Four-Legged Snake Fossil a Fake, Scientists Say. The problem is the fossil isn’t a fake at all. It’s just a misidentified species and new evidence shed light on that subject.

Thus, we have another entry in my Misleading Headlines category. This one comes from Newsweek who, in my opinion at least, should know better. Still, the unending quest for clicks takes no prisoners.

The Interest in a Four-Legged Snake

The article is actually quite interesting for a number of reasons. Four-legged snake fossil are of interest because the fossil record indicates snakes split off from their legged ancestors at some time in the past. This sort of DNA investigation often leads to new fossil discoveries nowadays.

Basically, scientists determine, through various means, when species split from one another and then begin searching for fossils that match the prediction. If it is true that snakes split off from vertebrates with legs, we’d except to see some fossils that look snake-like but also have four legs.

The original classification was introduced in Science Magazine back in 2015. A study of the rock formations from around where the fossil was found indicated it much likely classification was a marine lizard called dolichosaurs.

Fossil Theft

The second fascinating thing about the article is that the fossil is the illegality of its current location. It is illegal to remove fossils from Brazil, it’s original provenance, and has been so since 1945. It is currently held at the Bürgermeister-Müller-Museum in Solnhofen, Germany although the article doesn’t give an explanation as how it got there.

Perhaps it was stolen from the private collection or perhaps the owner or the owner’s heirs simply sold it and we unaware of the illegality of doing so. It’s impossible to guess from the article but it does shed a light on the lucrative and illegal fossil industry.

People like fossils and they can be incredibly valuable. Private collectors like to have such interesting things are willing to pay for them and public museums are not immune to such temptations either. Not that I’m accusing the Bürgermeister-Müller-Museum of any chicanery in this regard.

Conclusion

Great and interesting article about the possibility of a four-legged snake ancestor discovery. Terrible misleading headline indicating the fossil in question was a fake. It’s a simple misidentification, something that happens quite often.

Tom Liberman

Meghan Markle and Donald Trump Two Peas in a Pod

Posted on March 11, 2021 by Tom Liberman

Narcissistic Personalities

In an attempt to anger the entirety of the human race I thought I’d write about how Meghan Markle and Donald Trump are pretty much the same person. It appears to me they clearly share a few traits; namely a long-term pattern of exaggerated feelings of self-importance, an excessive craving for admiration, and struggles with empathy.

It’s called a narcissistic personality and the way both of them endlessly center their woes on the perceived behavior of others and refuse to accept any personal responsibility for the situations they find themselves in does not sit well with me.

Why You Support One and Not the Other

More to the point of this blog are the people who choose to support Meghan Markle and Donald Trump. They tend to be on the opposite end of the political spectrum. This paradox may surprise you but it does not come as any shock to me.

You see, politics don’t matter when it comes to people of this nature. They exist in a simple transactional environment where the only thing you are to them is a means to an end. Nothing political, ideological, moral, or ethical binds them from their goal of using you to get what they want. And, of course, you oblige.

We all have experience with this sort of person. You run into them after a long absence at some place you frequent. They tell you how great you look, laugh at your wonderful jokes; then they get to the point. What can you do for them? The meeting was no accident.

Meghan Markle used Piers Morgan to get into a party where she targeted Prince Harry, then she had no more need of Morgan so she dumped him. Donald Trump flailed around various political ideologies until he found a Republican base willing to listen to his completely disingenuous ramblings on immigration. When he no longer needs them, he dumps them. Meghan Markle and Donald Trump are largely one and the same.

Enlightened Self-Interest

I thought this might be a useful time to speak briefly on the concept of Enlightened Self-Interest because you might mistake the narcissism of Meghan Markle and Donald Trump for it. Nope. They tend to destroy all they touch in their mindless grasping for the glittery trinket in front of their face.

Someone who act to further the interests of others, or the interests of the group or groups to which they belong, ultimately serve their own self-interest. That’s enlightened self-interest.

Narcissists are Sometimes Right

It’s also important to understand that Meghan Markle and Donald Trump sometimes have good points. They aren’t wrong all the time and just because they are selfish, transactional people doesn’t mean we shouldn’t listen to their legitimate grievances.

I live in the real world and I’m quite certain Meghan Markle was subject to racist abuse and that Donald Trump was occasionally harassed not for his policies but simply because of his name. When bad things happen to bad people, we should call it out. That doesn’t make the narcissist less self-centered, it just makes us a better person.

Conclusion

When it comes to Meghan Markle and Donald Trump it is likely you hate one and support the other. If you dislike them both you are in the minority but, if it’s any comfort, you have my support.

Tom Liberman

Lying About the Texas Power Crisis

Posted on February 24, 2021 by Tom Liberman

The Question

The Texas Power Crisis of 2021 has engendered a lot of media attention in the last weeks but what I’d like to address is the lying associated with the crisis. Why are people failing to be honest about the causes of the Texas Power Crisis and what are the long-term impacts of such lies?

The Facts

The Governor of Texas, Greg Abbot, attributed the Texas Power Crisis to the freezing of wind turbines and he was followed largely by Republicans on both a state and national level.

Texas is a big wind power state for the simple reason there is a lot of open space but even at that, wind power only accounts for about 23% of the state’s total power output. When the cold weather swept down into the south many of the wind turbines froze but the primary cause of the power crisis was the loss of natural gas production.

Those in charge of energy production in Texas ignored warnings after a similar crisis called the Groundhog Day Blizzard back in 2011. They chose to hope that such a cold weather crisis would not happen again and are now reaping the consequences of that choice.

Why did Governor Abbot and his fellow Republicans lie about the main cause of the problem? The answer is quite simple, for political gain. Green Energy is largely considered a talking point of the Democratic Party and by blaming the wind turbines for the crisis, Abbot hopes to convince people that Democrats are to blame and, obviously, to vote for Republicans.

Not long ago, I wrote about how the Covid-19 crisis engendered similar lies along an anti-science line. I’ve also written about how green energy will supplant fossil fuels and why that is a good thing for all of us. I’ve also delved into the false belief of a Flat Earth and I think these subjects dovetail nicely with the Texas Power Crisis.

The point is anti-science rhetoric causes people not to trust science. It’s certainly true many people don’t subscribe to the lies Governor Abbot peddled about the Texas Power Crisis and most people believe that we live on a sphere. That being said, every time someone in authority lies to us, there are going to be people who believe those lies and make decisions about their life based on those falsehoods.

That’s the danger of lying in this manner and we have to gauge the benefits against those risks. Is the perceived benefit of political gain for one political party worth the potential losses that will certainly be sustained by a country that refuses to follow science and begins to fall behind the rest of the world in many ways?

I don’t doubt for a moment Governor Abbott and those like him think the risk is well-worth it. They believe if they come completely into power, they’ll be able to make the world a better place. They believe the ends justify the means and they are not alone. There are opportunists in every party and my own Libertarians fall into the same trap. You should read some of the crypto-currency nonsense floating around out there. And I’m a believer in the eventual rise of said monetary system.

In any case, that’s the question each one of us has to face. Are the lies worth it? Will enough people believe the lies to elect my politicians and few enough to avoid catastrophe for the United States?

Conclusion

My answer is, of course, tell the truth no matter where it leads. If I make a mistake, if my actions are responsible for the negative outcome; then I must show personal responsibility. I understand the consequences to an entire nation that devalues truth and science. I see the writing on the wall. I’m not willing to sacrifice my integrity for a few votes. Your opinion may differ.

Tom Liberman

Alien Planet Signal Misleading Headline

Posted on December 18, 2020 by Tom Liberman

No one likes a Misleading Headline more than me and if you wrap it up in an alien life story, you’re sure to catch my attention. Scientist believe they’ve detected mysterious radio signal from alien planet blares the highly misleading although technically accurate headline.

The headline from Chron, and other sources to be fair, that’s just the one I clicked on, in no small way tries to entice the unwary clicker to a story about radio signals from an alien race residing on said alien planet. Nope, as you’ve probably already guessed by the fact this article is my weekly series of Misleading Headlines. The planet itself vibrates in such a way as to be detected from Earth based telescopes.

This is actually an interesting and important breakthrough in the search for exoplanets, that is planets not in our solar system. If the signal turns out to actually be an alien planet, that means we should be able to detect other such planets in the future. This is useful information to have and might well increase the number of such planets we can find by a considerable amount.

The story itself is fairly interesting but the intentionally misleading headline earns my disdain. Again, the headline is actually perfectly accurate. The radio signal does come from an alien planet or exoplanet. This is the kind of headline that is subtly misleading while the author of it can claim, in all dishonesty, hey, I wrote the truth, it’s not my fault you can’t interpret the words correctly.

It’s a headline designed to deceive someone into clicking the link and getting to the article. The main problem I have with an accurate but misleading headline of this nature is that many people don’t bother to actually read the story or even click on the link and thus misinformation can spread.

Interesting story, interesting astronomy, misleading headline.

Tom Liberman

Haim Eshed says Aliens waiting for Sane and Understanding

Posted on December 9, 2020 by Tom Liberman

There’s a story making the rounds about a fellow named Haim Eshed who says aliens are waiting to disclose themselves to the people of earth until we are sane and understanding. He makes a number of other claims and his credentials are being touted as the former head of the Israeli Space Security program although I’m not sure what that means.

Some research indicates he was the first director of the Challenge Program, a division of the Department of Defense’s Office of Weapons Research, Development, and Technology Infrastructure, although again, I’m not really certain how that makes him knowledgeable in this field.

In any case, the qualifications of Eshed are not what I’m here to debate today. He makes quite a few outlandish claims but even that is not the focus of today’s talk. I want to discuss one claim in particular, the aliens are waiting for the people of this planet to be “sane and understanding.”

Eshed claims there is a Galactic Federation and they contacted the United States some time ago but don’t want their presence revealed until we reach the sane and understanding phase of our civilization. That if we are not sane and understanding, panic and chaos might result. As many problems as I can find with all of his claims, that’s the one that I couldn’t manage to swallow.

I mean, really, sane and understanding? This is the old science fiction trope dating back all the way to H. G. Wells, that people aren’t ready to know about aliens and therefore they must be kept a secret. Was there ever a time when people would descend into chaos because aliens appeared?

It’s my opinion people are not any saner or more understanding today than they were in ancient Egypt. That being said, we are quite capable of dealing with the idea of alien races, as were the ancients. What are people doing to do? Run out in the streets and riot? My guess is a pretty healthy majority of people would jump for joy at the news.

We are not going to have an epiphany of sane and understanding sweep over the world. The claim we can’t handle the news is just a feeble excuse for why Eshed offers no proof, as is often the case with people pushing nonsensical claims with no evidence. I could show you but you just aren’t ready to hear it. Ha!

If the aliens are waiting for sane and understanding they’ve already waited too long. Our level of sane and understanding hasn’t changed at all and isn’t likely to change in the future. We are what we are.

Tom Liberman

General Relativity Misleading Headline

Posted on November 26, 2020 by Tom Liberman

The Hill clocks in its second Misleading Headline of the Week in a row with a real doozy about General Relativity and research into Einstein’s groundbreaking theory. I’m a science geek, fully admitted, and I find the theory of General Relativity to be a fascinating contradiction of common sense. Therefore I was hoping for some interesting reading. Spoiler: Didn’t get it.

The headline promises a discussion on the subject of General Relativity but the article is all of five paragraphs long with three of them being but a single sentence. To quote a favorite YouTube food reviewer; My day is ruined and my disappointment is immeasurable. Well, not that bad but it was disappointing most certainly.

The article, what there is of it, has the scientist in question Joe Pesce discussing how time travel, which he doesn’t believe is possible, wouldn’t alter the world because the timeline would fix itself from paradoxes. Ok, well, I mean, I guess that sounds reasonable but it’s certainly not a discussion of General Relativity and it was absolutely not what I was expecting from the misleading headline.

Now, if you want to talk about gravitational lensing, the perihelion procession of Mercury, Frame-dragging tests, gravitational waves, or any other topic relating to the theory which my feeble brain tries to understand, well, bring it on! I’m game.

Tom Liberman

Government Responsibility for Fake Coronavirus Cures

Posted on March 9, 2020 by Tom Liberman

Coronavirus, Covid-19, is big news around the world these days and I like to examine what responsibility government has to protect citizens from the plethora of fake Coronavirus cures that are being promulgated far and wide.

As a Libertarian I don’t think the government has much responsibility in protecting us from ourselves. I oft rail against the War on Drugs as a failed attempt to do so. I’ve likewise spoken out against gambling laws but it is quite clear the internet is filled with fake Coronavirus cures and anyone taking these puts themselves, and others, at risk.

The basic idea for government intervention goes back as far as con-artists have been trying to take advantage of people. Someone recognizes a situation in which people are desperate, perhaps not thinking clearly, and attempts to take financial advantage of them with fraudulent claims. This constitutes a crime, fraud. The snake-oil salesperson sold you something under false pretenses and you are entitled to compensation for damages rendered.

In this case, the potential for damage is quite high as Coronavirus can be lethal. Perhaps you purchase a fake Coronavirus cure and then engage in risky activities because you think you are immune. Soon you or someone you come in contact with gets sick and dies. That’s significant from a legal perspective in awarding damages for fraud. Good. Damages should be awarded. This is the judicial branch of government doing what it should.

However, this situation involves the law enforcement arm of government ordering fake Coronavirus cures removed from sale altogether. In New York, for example, a silver cure offered by a religious figure is no longer legal to sell.

The question for me becomes, if someone believes an absolutely nonsensical claim and wastes money on a fake cure, is it the responsibility of the government to protect that person. You’d think the answer was quite simple. The threat is real, the cure is obviously fake, what is the harm in removing it from the public eye?

Here are my issues. Fake Coronavirus cures aren’t going away because the government bans them. While one particular phony cure will be eliminated from the market, a dozen others, rebranded and marketed will appear.

Can the government stop people from offering prayer as a way to cure or ward off the disease? Trust me, there are religious groups across the country offering this method as a curative. Should preachers who offer it be subject to arrest and imprisonment?

This is where government tries to protect us from ourselves. I have no problem with government agencies speaking loudly and clearly about the efficacy of reported treatments. I have no problem with media entities refusing to run advertisements for these products, I applaud them for doing so.

The reality is the government cannot protect us from phony Coronavirus cures. Only we can do that with critical thinking. When the government attempts to do so, they actually give people the impression there are no more fake cures out there, seeing as they have been restricted. Therefore, when you do see a cure, it must be real, right, because the government hasn’t banned it yet.

The only real solution is to be a responsible adult and make good decisions. Will people make stupid decisions? Certainly. That’s life. Does that mean we all might be infected because someone is an idiot, yep.

Freedom is free, it just isn’t safe.

Tom Liberman

Will Vegetarians Eat Cultured Meat?

Posted on February 18, 2020 by Tom Liberman

Have you heard of cultured meat? It’s a process of growing meat from the cells of animals. Cultured meat is coming to a market near you probably within the next five to ten years. There are a number of questions about the product but I’m mainly curious about the attitude of Vegans and Vegetarians; although everyone’s comments are welcome.

There are any number of benefits that cultured meat provides and one of these is that animals don’t suffer in the process. I think even animal husbandry die-hards will admit animals suffer in their industry. We have to admit billions of male chicks being summarily tossed into the incinerator isn’t a pleasant thought, even for those of us that enjoy eating the animals. I will not venture further down that path as it is not the point of my article.

Certainly, many vegetarians don’t eat meat for health reasons rather than concern for the welfare of animals but I think most people who eschew eating meat do so, at least partially, because of the suffering animals must endure. People also do so because of the negative environmental impacts associated with raising so many animals. Both of these concerns are at least largely removed if we eat such meat.

That leads to the question I posed in the title of this post. If you are a vegetarian or a vegan, would you eat cultured meat? Naturally, I’d like to hear from those who eat meat regularly also. I’m sure there are meat eaters out there who see cultured meat as a threat to the livelihood of those who raise cattle and chickens and would refuse to eat it for that reason. The situation is somewhat muddy as to who will partake in cultured meat and why they would be willing to do so.

One thing seems certain, like it or not, cultured meat is coming to a grocery shelf near you and it’s coming pretty quickly.

Loading ...

Tom Liberman

Helen Sharman says Aliens Definitely Exist

Posted on January 6, 2020 by Tom Liberman

There’s a clickbait headline making the rounds this morning in regards to statements made by Helen Sharman and the idea that aliens definitely exist. Sharman traveled into space back in 1991 and the fact that she is making the statement would seem to lend it credence. To some degree it’s a misleading headline in that Sharman is not saying she knows aliens definitely exist, that the government has been hiding it, and she has evidence from her trip to Mir.

What Sharman is saying is the likelihood aliens definitely exist is extremely high. That there are so many stars, so many planets, that the chemistry of the earth is so similar to those places, the odds of life not being anywhere else in the universe is exceedingly small. She even goes so far as to speculate that perhaps aliens are already on earth but we cannot detect them.

Sharman is almost completely correct in everything she says. The number of planets and the physical makeup of life which corresponds directly to the most abundant elements in the universe, make it extremely likely that life does exist elsewhere. I think it’s very likely we are less than decades away from finding such life on the various moons of the solar system and even on planets like Mars or Venus.

Where Sharman goes wrong, and where she defies the scientific method, is when she states aliens definitely exist. We have no evidence of such. Certainly, it seems very likely that aliens exist. I argue that it’s all but impossible alien life does not exist. The universe is simply far too vast for there not to be aliens. There was life, there is life, there will be life. However, I have absolutely no definitive evidence to indicate there is life, nor does anyone else.

I do not think that Sharman is trying to start or validate nonsensical alien theories. I think her statements are made with honest intent. The reason this is a story at all is because she is an astronaut, well, technically a cosmonaut as she was aboard the Russian space station Mir. This fact make it seem as if she is saying something she is not, the human mind leaps to conclusions that are not actually articulated.

What many people unfortunately think when they read the headline, and even the story itself, is that Sharman is confirming some nefarious plot in which she met aliens while a cosmonaut and is now spilling the secrets. This is not the case and it was not her intent in making the statement, or so I believe at least.

What she is saying is that, to her, it seems impossible there is not life somewhere in this vast universe. That such life might be on earth right now. I don’t disagree but I also will not say aliens definitely exist for the simple reason that I have no direct evidence of that existence. Until I do, I’ll temper my statements.

In any case, I think the story is an excellent illustration of how we often read more into a statement than is actually there. We want words to mean one thing even when they don’t and we convince ourselves otherwise. Try to avoid this trap.

Tom Liberman

Fluid Dynamics and Physics not Needed for Blood Spatter Analysis

Posted on December 13, 2018 by Tom Liberman

If you’re a fan of crime drama then you’ve almost certainly heard of Blood Spatter Analysis. It’s a technique used to determine how a crime happened. It doesn’t work. That’s very clear. The experts testifying about it generally know nothing of Fluid Dynamics or Physics and earn a certification after a forty-hour course. Yet, it’s an accepted science in almost every part of the United States. Lovely.

I just read an amazing article about how all of this came to be. Basically, one fellow invented the so-called science in his basement and was convincing in the courtroom despite having no scientifically backed evidence to back it. Now a horde of experts, almost all of whom trained with and were certified by him at his forty-hour course are testifying against one another in cases across the country. It’s not hard to find someone who will testify a blood spatter is evidence of absolute guilt while another person from the same discipline argues for complete innocence.

People’s blood is different in consistency and even different throughout the body. Weather can play an enormous role in fluid dynamics. Gravity plays a part. The setting on the air conditioner will make a difference in how blood behaves in various circumstances. There is good reason no readily repeatable experimentation on blood spatters exists. Yet, the testimony has resulted in any number of people being exonerated or convicted.

There is currently an effort by scientists with strong backgrounds in fluid dynamics and physics to try and make this actually work but the problems persist. It’s largely a field mired in confirmation bias. The result you want to get is the one you get. There just isn’t enough consistency in results to come to reliable conclusions.

There is a lot of sad in all of this. But, being the Libertarian that I am, I’m going to reserve my outrage mostly for myself. Why didn’t I realize this entire methodology is bunk? There is nothing in the article that I couldn’t have figured out simply by thinking about it for a bit. Obviously, blood splatters are going to have huge inconsistences based on wind, temperature, pressure, blood thickness, angles, and who knows what else.

Yet I ate it up on crime shows and assumed it was based on scientific principles all this time. Bad Tom! Do better.

Tom Liberman

Pluto is What Pluto is

Posted on September 9, 2018 by Tom Liberman

Is Pluto a planet or a dwarf planet? This question has roiled both the scientific and public world for the last twelve years. When it was discovered way back in 1930 by Clyde Tombaugh it was given the designation of planet. In 2006 the definition of what is a planet was changed and the little, relatively, world was reclassified as a dwarf planet.

I well understand the need to classify things so that we can communicate. Without definitions we have a difficult time expressing meaning to one another. In this case the reality is the only thing of importance. The designation means nothing. Pluto was discovered by humans back in 1930 but it has been galivanting about the solar system for billions of years in largely the form it is today. There is no name we can call it that will change its nature. Planet, Dwarf Planet, Kuiper Belt Object, whatever, it is the same. It is only we people who are upset about the classification and that is, to my way of thinking, somewhat telling.

Why do we care? Will it make any difference in your life? If Pluto is a planet are you better or worse? Is Pluto any different? The designation is merely so we can communicate effectively and the reality is in this case it doesn’t make any difference. The only chance of any confusion occurs if we are talking about the Disney character rather than the orbital body.

The question becomes why is it such a contention issue? Why do people have their own self-worth wrapped up in the fact that Pluto is or is not a planet? I cannot say for certain but I suspect the cause is related to our ego. We want to be right. We want to be better and smarter than the other people. We find like-minded allies and pat ourselves on the back at how smart we are because we know Pluto is one thing or another. This somehow validates our feelings about ourselves and that’s a shame.

Pluto is what Pluto is, regardless of the designation we give it. You are who you are, with no importance given to what others may call you. Nothing changes. The kind of person you choose to be is defined by other things: The way you behave towards others, the things you say about other people. Your behavior defines you. Your existence. Not the names people call you, that’s their problem.

What makes you a better or worse person has nothing to do with how others designate you. You are you and so Pluto is Pluto.

Tom Liberman

Harrison Bader and the Easy Five Star Catch

Posted on September 1, 2018 by Tom Liberman

Recently a St. Louis Cardinal outfielder, Harrison Bader, made a game ending catch that was rated as a Five Star catch although it didn’t appear, to the eye, to be particularly difficult. It gives me good reason to discuss the difference between a metric based analysis and the eye test. The eye test says: If it looks like a difficult catch, it must be one. If it looks easy, then it probably was. The eye test has merit but statistical analysis should always triumph.

First a quick look at how Statcast derives their rating system. They look at four factors. How far the outfielder has to travel to get to the ball. How much time that outfielder has. The direction the outfielder must run. The proximity to a wall in which the catch is made. Basically, Statcast feeds every ball hit into the outfield into a database and applies a calculation to see what percentage of the time the outfielder at that position would make the catch. Anytime the number drops to 25% or less, it is considered a Five Star catch.

When Bader made his catch the other night it certainly didn’t pass the eye test. It looked like a good play at best. This is where metric based analysis is decidedly better than most subjective opinions. Bader is extremely fast and seems to have an excellent feel for the flight of the baseball immediately off the bat of the hitter. This means he gets started in the correct direction very quickly and arrives at the intersection point with the ball rapidly. It’s true that Bader certainly makes that play more than 25% of the time. I’d hazard a guess that he makes it more like 80% of the time. That doesn’t change the fact that 75% of the time a ball hit with a similar trajectory goes for a base hit. That’s the power of metric based analysis.

Remember, Bader’s own catches are part of that mix. Because he catches a lot of balls of this nature that drives down the difficulty rating of the catch. If you take Bader’s catches out of the equation the catch becomes even less likely.

Statcast and its outfield defensive ratings is a relatively new statistic. There will certainly be some adjustments going forward and the larger the data set, the more accurate the percentages. That being said, it was a Five Star catch by the best measurable rating currently available. I’ll take that over the eye test any day of the week.

You’d be wise to the do the same and that applies to other aspects of life as well. It’s easy to be fooled when doing the eye test. Look at the numbers, trust the numbers. Do you know in the United States, violent crime is at its lowest point in over fifty years? Can’t argue with the math.

Tom Liberman

No Recess During Eclipse

Posted on August 17, 2017 by Tom Liberman

If you were a child and told you could not go outside during a solar eclipse because looking at the sun was dangerous; would that make you more or less likely to go outside on the sly? I think the answer to this question gives us great insight into the problems associated with a state that tries too hard to protect us from ourselves.

The Cumberland Valley School District sent a letter to parents explaining that recess will be cancelled on Monday August 21st during the full solar eclipse. I think it’s a mistake and I’m happy to tell you why. I don’t disagree that looking at the sun is dangerous. I think children should be warned not to look at the eclipse as it could damage their eyes. I understand the danger of litigation. I just think preventing children from going outside during the event is a silly way to go about protecting the children.

A far better solution would be to assemble outside with all of the students and have a telescope with appropriate lenses on it for them to use. Another solution would be to have an assembly where a live broadcast of the eclipse is shown on screen. Perhaps parents could be asked to purchase eyewear that will protect the student and send it to class with their child that day.

There are many, many solutions available to the district and they chose the one that is probably going to endanger the students the most. By telling them they can’t go outside at all, they work against human nature. Just looking at the sun during a normal day will cause blindness. Children go outside quite frequently and manage not to blind themselves. I understand the special circumstances of the eclipse will generate more interest in looking at it, I just think the solution is utterly silly.

This attempted solution mimics what government does when they try to force behavior on its citizens. Using mind altering drugs can be dangerous. Getting married is a good thing. The government rewards behavior they think is useful and punishes behavior they think is dangerous. The problem is that such actions generally create new and bigger problems than those they are trying to solve.

I don’t want to give a series of examples, starting with the War on Drugs, to show the generally negative outcome of such laws; I just want you to contemplate what happened in school when you were young and there was a solar eclipse. Were you denied recess? Were you herded into a dark room to mitigate the chances you’d blind yourself? How many kids were blinded?

It’s always important to consider the result of any rule or law you might want to enforce. If the only good it’s going to do is make people feel like they are doing something useful, then maybe you should reconsider.

Tom Liberman

My Problem with the Multiverse or Why Infinity Does not Equal All Encompassing

Posted on August 1, 2017 by Tom Liberman

I’m quite confused by why people seem to think that infinite equals all-encompassing. This seems to me to be one of the core ideas in the concept of the multiverse. This is to say, if there are an infinite number of universes, then all things must be represented in them somewhere or another.

Let me preface my article with the simple fact that I am not a theoretical physicist. My understanding of the Multiverse, or at least the postulations of such, might be mistaken. I’m going to continue on with my thoughts here as if my understanding is correct. If that’s not the case, I’m hopeful someone will explain it to me more clearly.

I’ll further mention one of the main purposes of this discussion is to further my ideas of atheism, rather than a fundamental understanding of the universe.

My understanding of the Multiverse is that it is infinite. That there are an infinite number of universes within the multiverse and therefore in one of them I am dating Jennifer Aniston. Now, this is certainly a pleasant thought, but I don’t think it is true. My main problem is the supposition that infinite must mean all-encompassing. If there are infinite universes, then all things must be represented in them.

Where this correlates with my atheism is when I hear this argument from those who believe in an omnipotent and omniscient god. If there is a multiverse then there is the possibility of such a god. If such a possibility exists, then it must exist because of the infinity issue.

The entire idea that infinity equals all-encompassing seems to me to be quite easily falsified. If I have an infinite list of even numbers, nowhere on it is an odd number. Nor can any delightful bowls of Ben & Jerry Cherry Garcia ice cream be found on said list, sadly. Infinite clearly is not all-encompassing. Therefore, it stands to logical reason that while the Multiverse might well be infinite, that does not mean any particular thing can be found within it. In none of the universes am I dating Aniston, again sadly.

It’s clear to me there are many things that do not exist in the universe. The last digit of Pi for example. The last digit at all. An integer that calculates exactly the square root of any prime number. There are almost certainly far more things not in the multiverse than are in it. Is there a pink unicorn named Edwina? Are any of the characters from my novels a real person in any of those universes? Of course not, although perhaps we can’t prove it logically as we can with mathematics. It’s mere common sense.

That’s pretty much it. Infinite doesn’t equal all-encompassing. As I stated earlier, perhaps I’m misunderstanding the ideas presented about the multiverse. I’d happily love to learn more.

Tom Liberman

Can an ICBM be Intercepted?

Posted on April 25, 2017 by Tom Liberman

I’m of the opinion the general belief of people is that the United States is currently capable of intercepting Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles (ICBM). That such attacks heading toward our country from an enemy like China, North Korea, or Russia can be stopped.

The U.S. military has certainly claimed, via the Missile Defense Agency, that such interceptions are completely possible. To date, tests against ballistic missiles have been fairly unsuccessful. In controlled environments, the interceptions have been successful only sporadically. These tests don’t include all the variables of a real attack.

The Israeli Arrow system has been proven effective against Medium Range Ballistic Missiles (MRBM) and that’s a good thing. However, such missiles are moving at significantly lower speed than ICBMs.

The reality is somewhat disturbing. ICBMs are coming in at a speed of around seven kilometers per second. This velocity means any intercepting device has to calculate the course of the incoming attack, pass the information to a computer, analyze an interception path, and implement said path very quickly. Perhaps too quickly.

There are absolute laws in this world, the laws of physics. I’m not a mathematician and I also don’t want to underestimate human ingenuity. That being said, it seems likely to me that such an intercept might well be impossible. I’m not saying we should stop attempting to create a system that intercept such attacks, I’m just suggesting that we understand the difficulties involved and the fact that, currently, such attacks cannot be thwarted with any reliability.

I think it is important in our decision-making process to understand these facts. If our leaders, military commanders, and even the general population is under the impression we can stop such attacks, then we are likely to engage in activity that risk them.

Reality is sometimes unkind. It’s wonderful to imagine we can intercept ICBM attacks and prevent nuclear devastation. It’s even nicer to imagine that if we can’t do so today, with a lot of hard work and dedication, we will be able to do so in the future.

I think it’s entirely possible that it is physically impossible to prevent an ICBM attack on our country. That no matter how hard we work at it and how much money we spend on the problem, we will never be able to do so.

I certainly hope I’m wrong. It would be wonderful if a defensive umbrella could be created to prevent any country from using ICBMs on another country. Nuclear devastation is a bad thing. We shouldn’t want to use nuclear weapons on another country and obviously, we hope they are unable to do so to us.

An unpleasant reality is that we cannot currently prevent an ICBM attack on our country. This being the case, we need to base our political policies upon this fact. Anything else is foolish.

Tom Liberman

Radishes Grown on Mars – Martian Soil – Martian Like Soil – Misleading Headline

Posted on June 26, 2016 by Tom Liberman

Scientists are About to Eat Radishes Grown in Martian Soil blares the headline.

The implication is that we’ve grown Radishes on Mars or at the very least that we have Martian soil here on Earth that we used to grow some radishes. The reality, not so much.

The radishes were grown in a nutrient poor soil designed to be similar to Martian soil. I’m guessing it wasn’t grown under the same conditions we’d find on Mars.

Interesting experiment, no, not even that. There are all kinds of people working on growing crops in nutrient poor soil. Pure click bait. The experiment itself, the story, and the headline especially.

I do love me some radishes though!

Loading ...

Tom Liberman
Sword and Sorcery fantasy with a Libertarian Ideology
Current Release: The Gray Horn
Next Release: For the Gray

Flat Earth, Columbus, Rap, and Interesting Facts

Posted on January 29, 2016 by Tom Liberman

There’s a great little story making the rounds about a singer named B.o.B who is telling his fans the earth is flat and the backlash from Neil deGrasse Tyson and others. It’s a great story because it shows the degrees to which people will give credence to a popular figure in areas where he or she is not credible.

Let me try to explain by going on a little journey in time.

Where is that time travel hat of mine … it was in the upstairs closet … no … wait … here it is under the kitchen sink. How did it get there? Oh well, never mind. Pop it on the old noggin, spin around three times, wooo-woo-flashing-lights-special-effects, and KABLOOM.

Here I am in Ancient Greece watching a balding fellow taking measurements on the shadow of a little triangle set in a rock.

“Whatcha doing?” I ask.

“Measuring the circumference of the earth,” he replies (in Ancient Greek but luckily my time travel hat is also a universal translator).

“Really?” I reply.

“Yep,” he says. “By measuring the shadow here and also at Syene on the same day at the same time I can calculate it based on the distance between Alexandria and Syene and difference in the cast of the shadow. About 252,000 stadia (my hat tells me that’s 46,620 kilometers).”

“Da-damn,” I reply. “That’s some smart ass poop. Well, gotta be going.” I don’t want to tell him his calculation is off by about 16%, it’s pretty good work he’s done. He just doesn’t know the earth isn’t a sphere but bulges in the middle and that the distance between the two cities is a bit off. I put my hat back on … and well, you know.

KABLOOM.

Still in Ancient Greece but this time looking at a man with a full complement of curly hair drawing very pretty maps.

“Watcha doing?” I ask.

“Drawing a map of the world,” he replies.

“Cool, where did you get the information to determine how big it is?”

“Well, there was this fellow, Eratosthenes, he did some calculations with sun and shadows but I’ve traveled all over the world and I think just by looking at things I’m a better judge of how big it is than all that silly math. What better judge than our own eyes?”

“Hmm,” I say. “That’s one way to look at it.”

Back on with the hat.

KABLOOM (getting a little dizzy now).

Now I’m in Middle Ages Italy looking at a fellow drawing really nice maps.

“Whatcha doing?” I ask.

“I’m making a map of the world,” he replies.

“Cool, you’re a really good artist. These are amazing. How did you determine its size?”

“There was this fellow who drew nice maps back in Ancient Greece and I’m using his model.”

“Why not the math fellow’s models?”

“He didn’t draw maps, just calculated the size using math. Better to go with the guy who traveled the world and was a good artist!”

“Got it,” I reply with a sigh and slip the hat upon my head once again.

KABLOOM. (Feeling a bit nauseous at this point)

Wow, I’m on the deck of ship. Short interlude of vomiting.

Stagger over to the captain, “Watcha doing?”

“We’re sailing to India for trade. Money to be made you know.”

“It doesn’t look like you’ve got enough stores to make it that far,” I say with a raised eyebrow.

“According to these very pretty maps the world is about 30,000 kilometers in circumference.”

“Have you done the math?”

“Why do that? Look how pretty the maps are.”

“Right,” I say, take a breath, and don my hat once again.

KABLOOM.

Here I sit in front of my computer at the end of my extremely simplified tale of why Columbus thought he could sail around the world when the distance was much more than he realized.

I hope you’ve learned something.

Tom Liberman
Sword and Sorcery fantasy with a Libertarian Ideology
Current Release: The Girl in Glass I: Apparition
Next Release: The Gray Horn

Sharks Swim in Boiling Water – Misleading Headline

Posted on July 11, 2015 by Tom Liberman

I’ve been derelict in my Misleading Headline duties for a few weeks, finishing up The Girl in Glass I: Apparition taking priority but I’m back with a doozy.

It’s Shark Week on Discovery and that brings any story on sharks out of the woodwork and into the headlines.

Amazing footage of sharks swimming in boiling water around a volcano is completely baffling scientists screams the ridiculous and misleading headline.

The story, as is often the case in these situations, is actually quite interesting.

A team of scientists lowered a camera into an inactive, underwater caldera. Basically the giant hole from a collapsed volcanic eruption. The keyword here is, of course, inactive.

Yes when the underwater volcano is erupting it spews forth highly toxic gases and heats up to thousands of degrees. When it’s inactive it’s simple ocean habitat. Sharks swim in the ocean. So there you go. Still it is pretty cool footage. Go take a look at the article but ignore the headline.

Tom Liberman
Sword and Sorcery fantasy with a Libertarian Ideology
Current Release: The Black Sphere
Next Release: The Girl in Glass I: Apparition – Release date: late August 2015