from Science: Its a Girl Thing
“Science: It’s a Sexy Thing”
(I had this kvetch on “draft” since 6/27/12, but then we lost electricity and I didn’t bother posting it. It strikes me as even more outrageous than when I first saw it!)
This comically absurd music video, “Science: It’s a Girl Thing” http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/22/science-its-a-girl-thing-_n_1620235.html?utm_hp_ref=science is understandably evoking outrage and/or guffaws. Scantily clad girls and women are Continue reading
Is there a connection between the ‘Derecho’ and the SCOTUS decision?
This, from “The People’s Cube”
Comrades, it has been a scary weekend, without electricity, and hunkered down in our basement here in the suburbs of DC, first as a mighty storm made our 3 floors compound rattle as if there was an earthquake with a shock-&-awe light-sound show that made Tom Cruise’s “War Of The Worlds” movie epic merely a kiddy show, and then as the threat of looting has turned me, a card carrying member of the Communist Party, into a de facto virtual member of the NRA (my mothballed Makarov is still in perfect working order…). After all, I am more equal than others, and I can’t share my stuff with DC looters. Continue reading
I was asked what I thought of the ninth recommendation among Julie Steinberg’s “nine rules women must follow to get ahead”: Dress well and play golf.
“You need to learn how to play golf. You don’t have to be good, but you have to be competent enough to be invited for quality bonding time.”
The idea of recommending a woman take on a sport or hobby that is popular with male colleagues but which she wouldn’t have pursued otherwise is, in my opinion, absurd and bound to be self-defeating. Continue reading
Gelman has a blogpost today where he wrings his hands over those who make mistakes and won’t admit it (the example he gives is rather distant but amusing in its own right):
http://andrewgelman.com/2012/05/the-hare-the-pineapple-and-ed-wegman/#comments
Well as it happens I was discussing just today (in relation to philosophy of statistics) how common it is for people in this arena to admit error and still just go on and repeat the identical example and argument (in print!) without even mentioning the criticisms that earlier, allegedly, led them to disown their own example/argument. I mentioned a case in relation to my April 28 post, and several others throughout this blog. It’s perhaps a brilliant strategy: Continue reading
Dear Reader: As soon as I saw this list, immediately, several of my own picks for (current) “annoying phrases” popped into my mind, but I have no interest in sharing them on a Reader’s Digest Facebook page ; so here they are, following the 10 given by Reader’s Digest. Share yours, if you wish.
Reader’s Digest List of Most Annoying Phrases:
1. At the end of the day
2. Fairly unique
3. I personally
4. At this moment in time
5. With all due respect
6. Absolutely
7. It’s a nightmare
8. Shouldn’t of
9. 24-7
10. It’s not rocket science
Mayo’s (from most irksome to quite annoying)
1. Gotcha (when said repeatedly to mean, “I understand”)
2. Don’t worry about it.
3. We sure don’t.
4. (It’s a) no brainer.
5. Tell me about it.
6. No problem.
7. Running on all cylinders.
8. I hear you.
9. That’s just me.
10. Welcome to my world.
Dear Reader: I think the main reason I scurried out of my London “flat” late last night, was not so much because I saw a mouse walking just outside my bedroom, but because, instead of flashing by at lightening speed, as in the handful of other times I’ve seen mice in my life (twice in London), this one was leisurely sauntering by, not in any rush to go anywhere. That seemed unnerving… . Never mind, I moved out until the error could be corrected. George Chatfield was right to suggest a few days ago that they should rent cats, or at least cat litter for visitors. The experience didn’t really alter my Popper lecture today at the London School of Economics (“How Experiment Got a Life (of its own)”), except that I omitted some of the slides on transgenic mice. (I will ask the blogsfolk to post the paper here, to be part of a book on philosophy of experiment.)
Does this not give further support of my cell phone meanderings in my Dec. 20 post? Last night I walked into an elevator in Queens in which a man was jabbering on his cell, facing the wall, and he says in a perfectly loud voice “oh wait, I can’t tell you now,..no, yeah someone is listening….” Door opens and he’s out before I can can tell him…what? That I am not listening? That he has an exaggerated sense of self-importance? I don’t know but it’s a good thing for him he got out fast…couldn’t even say for sure if he was wearing his pink tie!
Scientific Study: Men Grow Peacock Tails Around Attractive women:
Am I the only one who occasionally feels that when an ordinary phenomenon, familiar to most women, becomes the focus of a “rigorous scientific” study like this that the whole dynamics is convert
ed in a distorted, unflattering and rather (pea)cockamamie light?
Men put on their best behaviour when attractive ladies are close by. When the scenario is reversed however, the behaviour of women remains the same. These findings are published today, 2 February 2012, in the British Psychological Society’s British Journal of Psychology via the Wiley Online Library.
The research, which also found that the number of kind and selfless acts by men corresponded to the attractiveness of ladies, was undertaken by Dr Wendy Iredale of Sheffield Hallam University and Mark Van Vugt of the VU University in Amsterdam and the University of Oxford. Continue reading
What is it that’s so annoying about a person talking at length on their cell phone in public? (I was reminded of this while waiting in airport lines as of late.) The same person could be talking to an embodied person and I wouldn’t notice; it certainly wouldn’t irk me this way. But put me in line with this person on their cell phone—or put us on the bus or in an elevator together—and I can’t help but feeling just the tiniest bit outraged. But by what? Their bloated sense of self-importance? Why do I find it so obnoxious? I’m guessing I’m not alone*, yet it seems somewhat irrational (assuming the issue isn’t the loudness). It’s worst I think when the user is just shooting the breeze, or sounding as if they’re closing a deal, or describing (in “real-time”) being in line. Continue reading
In the Clutches of the TSAI don’t know if this is true, but I was told yesterday by some TSA inspectors that there would no longer be an “opt-out” option from full-body scanners in Europe. (Anyone know about this?) About to pass through security at Heathrow (British Air) I began the usual strip, including knee brace, which invariably triggers bells. I was told they didn’t want me removing the knee brace “in public”, so I went through the machine, it went off, and I was given a pat down and told I also had to go through the full-body scanner which I always opt out of (not that it has often arisen). They usually grab a bullhorn and yell out loudly “female opt out!” in order to signal the need for a non-male TSA rep to do the pat down. This time, however, they told me there had just a few days ago been a change of rules in Europe, and there was no opting out (if selected). 
After I argued for several minutes that neither the safety nor the effectiveness of the full-body scan had passed severe tests, I suddenly found myself surrounded by 4 male TS officials who said I either go through the full-body scanner or not fly. I received a form in which to write my complaint to the authorities. After I submitted to their invasion of privacy, they still demanded I take the brace off—I guess it was ok to perform in public now. Any females with similar experiences?
If the following is true, I hope she succeeds in suing:(updated Dec. 3, 2011)
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162-57336167/84-year-old-claims-tsa-strip-search/
You have entered the land of my alternate blog! Click here to return to Error Statistics Philosophy
Rejected Posts of D. Mayo 