Comments for Science and Language

Comment on What would language be like without words? by gpk

gpk — Wed, 11 Aug 2010 01:47:12 +0000

You are right, thanks! Par=even, impar=odd. I fixed the text.

Comment on What would language be like without words? by Proof-Reading Books – You’ll Be Surprised ! « shiyan

Proof-Reading Books – You’ll Be Surprised ! « shiyan — Tue, 10 Aug 2010 15:28:46 +0000

[...] What would language be like without words? « Science and Language [...]

Comment on What would language be like without words? by Greg

Greg — Fri, 06 Aug 2010 18:50:04 +0000

I should look up the original for this, but I found a very appropriate quote to show how people began English grammar by describing it in Latin terms. In 1532, Vives wrote “In our time, we need rules… and all the Rules have to be wrested out of the Roman authors.”

That quote is found in the introduction to Love’s Labour’s Lost, ed. A. E. Morgan and W. Sherard Vines, published by Blackie and Son Limited, London, no date (but probably circa 1958 from a stamp). It is an edition of Shakespeare, of course, but he didn’t write his own introductions.

Comment on What would language be like without words? by Rolando

Rolando — Thu, 29 Jul 2010 10:46:25 +0000

The plural in spanish of “número par” is “números pares” not “números impares”

Comment on Nifty instructional technology by R. Hardin

R. Hardin — Tue, 27 Apr 2010 18:51:15 +0000

These little devices are called clickers and they are great. They improve student participation because of the anonymity of the responses. Several universities issue students their own clickers and program them so they can be used for class discussions and even assessments.

Comment on My First Troll by Water as a Fuel

Water as a Fuel — Thu, 18 Feb 2010 13:33:44 +0000

using water as fuel for cars is really possible. in fact, there are already diff countries whose using this technology.

Comment on The CRU climate leak – ouch. by hadmin

hadmin — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 19:51:40 +0000

Good link. Seems sensible. Shame he’s at a think tank, though: my general belief is that think tank members are paid because of their political views, and therefore their views are generally not to be trusted. (I.e. their mortgage payment depends on remaining true to their paymaster.)

Comment on The CRU climate leak – ouch. by Don Monroe

Don Monroe — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 00:54:49 +0000

Roger Pielke Jr. has a post on the data-retention issue.

Comment on The CRU climate leak by gpk

gpk — Sat, 28 Nov 2009 19:33:53 +0000

I did what I said: I picked a few to look at in detail, because I wanted to see what a “normal” email from the group was. I’m quite aware that there are some dubious e-mails in there (enough people are making noise about them).

The question I care about is whether these people are pseudoscientists or not. Not whether they have screwed up. That would make a big difference in how I would interpret their research output. If they are generally competent (with or without occasional screwups) then their research outputs have some value. On the other hand, if they normally operated with the intent to lie and decieve, then everything they wrote would have been crap.

So far, I have not seen evidence of the latter.

Comment on The CRU climate leak by PJP

PJP — Sat, 28 Nov 2009 16:20:35 +0000

You need to read more. A lot more.
It looks to me as though you really, REALLY don’t want to find anything wrong.

I suspect that you only read the three emails listed above, or cherry picked what you reported on.

I am not going to spoon feed you – do your research before writing.

If you need a pointer, for get the emails (until you understand the background) – start on the HARRY-README file.