HumANomaly

We are so enthralled by the wonderful claims made by scientists that we seem not to notice that scientists have NEVER studied the things they make their claims about. How do I know that to be true? Because I am a statistician and statistical analysis is the foundation of all scientific research.

Your first intellectual reaction was to think that I must be off my rocker because when scientists make claims about stars they actually study stars, but that is not where my mind is today

Statistics, like evolution, is based on populations. If a scientist studies one object he knows that he does not have sufficient information to make a reasoned conclusion. That is why they study groups of sunjects. But they never really study the group. They take measurments on the individuals that make up the group and then they aggregate that information in some way. But the information they provide to the publc is about the group even if there is no way they could ever obtain that information from the group. The average height of a group of children is not an actual value; it is a calculated value. There is no way to observe the height of a group.

So, it is obvious that scientists do not describe what they actually study, which leads us to ask, "What are the implications of making claims about something you cannot and did not observe?"