Sunday, October 01, 2006
Junk science on the march
An interesting Initiative will be on the ballot here in Washington in November. It aims to discourage theft by governments. The Property Fairness Initiative, Prop 933, is mainly sponsored by the Wash Farm Bureau on behalf of farmers.
From the Farm Bureau's website, the main points:
We want politicians to think before they act. Initiative 933 will require politicians and agencies to:
1. Tell us why they want new regulations.
2. Identify the properties they want to regulate.
3. Identify how much damage they will cause to the use and value of private property.
4. Determine if voluntary, cooperative programs can accomplish the goal.
If the politicians and agencies then decide to damage the use and value of private property, they must follow the state Constitution and pay for the damage.
SPLENDID idea.
It broke into the news yesterday when a counter-group, sponsored mainly by ecofascists, issued a "scientific" study that "proves" the initiative won't work. This counter-group, based at Univ of Wash in Seattle, has "done the research" and "run the numbers", determining that the Prop will cost about $8 billion each year; they say it will bankrupt counties and cities.
Well, now. How does science work? By observation of reality. If the question involves a cause-and-effect relationship, scientists are supposed to run an experiment. But how do we run an experiment here?
Aha! We don't have to run an experiment. It turns out that Oregon passed a nearly identical proposition two years ago. Oregon is nearly identical to Washington in every way that matters: population, history, geography, economy, ethnic makeup, main industries, climate, political tendencies. So, did Oregon go bankrupt? Nope. Every time the proposition was used, the governmental entity backed off and revised or revoked the regulation.
That's science. We have a valid experiment, showing that the idea works exactly the way it was meant to work.
Despite all that, the academics at UW will certainly get the credit for doing a "scientific study" because they are speculating and using computer models.
This is a huge problem in today's world, not just in science but in news and culture as well. We have somehow picked up the axiom that theories and computer models are truth, while demonstrable, valid, and appropriate facts are irrelevant. ¶ 3:06 PM
From the Farm Bureau's website, the main points:
We want politicians to think before they act. Initiative 933 will require politicians and agencies to:
1. Tell us why they want new regulations.
2. Identify the properties they want to regulate.
3. Identify how much damage they will cause to the use and value of private property.
4. Determine if voluntary, cooperative programs can accomplish the goal.
If the politicians and agencies then decide to damage the use and value of private property, they must follow the state Constitution and pay for the damage.
SPLENDID idea.
It broke into the news yesterday when a counter-group, sponsored mainly by ecofascists, issued a "scientific" study that "proves" the initiative won't work. This counter-group, based at Univ of Wash in Seattle, has "done the research" and "run the numbers", determining that the Prop will cost about $8 billion each year; they say it will bankrupt counties and cities.
Well, now. How does science work? By observation of reality. If the question involves a cause-and-effect relationship, scientists are supposed to run an experiment. But how do we run an experiment here?
Aha! We don't have to run an experiment. It turns out that Oregon passed a nearly identical proposition two years ago. Oregon is nearly identical to Washington in every way that matters: population, history, geography, economy, ethnic makeup, main industries, climate, political tendencies. So, did Oregon go bankrupt? Nope. Every time the proposition was used, the governmental entity backed off and revised or revoked the regulation.
That's science. We have a valid experiment, showing that the idea works exactly the way it was meant to work.
Despite all that, the academics at UW will certainly get the credit for doing a "scientific study" because they are speculating and using computer models.
This is a huge problem in today's world, not just in science but in news and culture as well. We have somehow picked up the axiom that theories and computer models are truth, while demonstrable, valid, and appropriate facts are irrelevant. ¶ 3:06 PM
