Statistics is more often than not used as a "tool on the side" to illustrate study conclusions, while it should be at the very heart of any scientific analysis, all the way from the initial measurement planning to the model validation and further. Too often, the scientific process is still largely based on subjective judgement instead of robust statistics. While experience helps to avoid glaring errors, the process is doomed to produce erratic research as long as decent statistics are not involved. Judgement can be deceived, numbers can't.
Regarding communication: that's completely normal. Have you ever tried making carefully qualified statements when explaining scientific research to the public? It does not work. The public expects definite statements from science, it doesn't want to hear what uncertainties are involved or what data is lacking for more certain conclusions.
The conversion is pretty straightforward using ogr2ogr. It's part of the GDAL library for geospatial data. Other OSS software like QGis or FWTools rely on, or include GDAL for these conversions.
Depends on your social circle, I think. I'm in Belgium, and like you, only a minority of the people I know are religious. But on the whole of Belgium, I suspect things are quite different.
Anyway, I have no data to support this. I just *fear* that they have their numbers going for them.
Slashdot Mirror
Hardly an argument to call this a green energy scam, no?
Could you explain the "green energy scam" part?
Slashdot is hardly a replacement for Usenet. Can I get answers for 3 tech questions per day over here?
Even if it was, in what way would it be superior to Usenet?
And those ways are? And in what way are they superior?
Completely agree with this.
Statistics is more often than not used as a "tool on the side" to illustrate study conclusions, while it should be at the very heart of any scientific analysis, all the way from the initial measurement planning to the model validation and further. Too often, the scientific process is still largely based on subjective judgement instead of robust statistics. While experience helps to avoid glaring errors, the process is doomed to produce erratic research as long as decent statistics are not involved. Judgement can be deceived, numbers can't.
Quite interesting in this regard: http://www.sciencenews.org/view/feature/id/57091/title/Odds_are,_its_wrong
Regarding communication: that's completely normal. Have you ever tried making carefully qualified statements when explaining scientific research to the public? It does not work. The public expects definite statements from science, it doesn't want to hear what uncertainties are involved or what data is lacking for more certain conclusions.
This study might be interesting in this context: http://arxiv.org/abs/1004.5009v1
The conversion is pretty straightforward using ogr2ogr. It's part of the GDAL library for geospatial data. Other OSS software like QGis or FWTools rely on, or include GDAL for these conversions.
Depends on your social circle, I think. I'm in Belgium, and like you, only a minority of the people I know are religious. But on the whole of Belgium, I suspect things are quite different.
Anyway, I have no data to support this. I just *fear* that they have their numbers going for them.
Most of us? I suppose you mean most of the Slashdot crowd... Out there, I'm afraid the religious folk take a wopping majority. Very afraid.
Maybe that's too expensive for use in preventing malaria in Africa but I'd buy one in a second!
Am I the only one who finds this statement on the perverse side?
Just for the record: you probably mean Galician.
With a little effort you can still get your head around DT... but check out earlier Meshuggah recordings, Dillinger Escape Plan and related bands.
:-)
Now *THAT* is a challenge
Stop your metabitching already!
Sorry, but you're wrong.
Celsius temperature is an SI derived unit, so it is nowhere near obsolete. The inch, on the other hand, is indeed as obsolete as Margaret Thatcher.
See here, for instance.
In other news, the researchers behind the study complained about their funding in reality cheques.
They prefer cash now.