Bad science in layman literature on the internet

[shunyadragon]

Latest UK and World News, Sport and Comment | Express.co.uk (bad science web site) strikes again with an interesting 'alien life and extraterrestrials discovered on Mars.

Life on Mars: Alien hunters claim to spot advanced UFOs on Red Planet

ALIEN hunters believe they have found UFOs on Mars which help extraterrestrials traverse the solar system.
By SEAN MARTIN

UFO expert believes that NASA captured a photo of an alleged alien pyramid on Mars. Aside from the pyramid, the expert claimed he also saw carvings of alien faces in the photo.

The strange sighting was reported by Scott Waring of ET Data Base. In a recent blog post, Waring said he spotted the strange object while browsing Gigapan, a website that features high-resolution photos taken by NASA on Mars.

The photo that caught Waring’s attention was taken by NASA’s Curiosity rover on SOL 346, which is equivalent to July 27, 2013 on Earth. According to the details of the photo, the image was taken while the rover was exploring a region on Mars known as Elsie Mountain.

As Waring was going through the photo, he came across a cluster of large rocks sticking out from the surface. According to the UFO expert, the rocks could be relics that came from an ancient alien civilization that one lived on Mars. According to Waring, one of the alleged relics was a pyramid that has four sides.

“The pyramid has four sides and perfectly balanced on each side,” he stated in a blog post. “It has sunk into the sands over time and one side of the pyramid is deep under the dirt, but we can still see its magnificent detail.”

Behind the alleged pyramid are massive objects that Waring referred to as sculptures of heads. Waring came to this conclusion after identifying several features of the sculptures, such as the nose, ear, eyes and cheeks.
Waring believes that similar to the Egyptian pyramids and statues of pharaohs on Earth, the alleged sculptures he spotted on the photo depicted the ancient Martian culture of the Red Planet.

 

[Heyo]

Latest UK and World News, Sport and Comment | Express.co.uk (bad science web site) strikes again with an interesting 'alien life and extraterrestrials discovered on Mars.

Life on Mars: Alien hunters claim to spot advanced UFOs on Red Planet

ALIEN hunters believe they have found UFOs on Mars which help extraterrestrials traverse the solar system.
By SEAN MARTIN

UFO expert believes that NASA captured a photo of an alleged alien pyramid on Mars. Aside from the pyramid, the expert claimed he also saw carvings of alien faces in the photo.

The strange sighting was reported by Scott Waring of ET Data Base. In a recent blog post, Waring said he spotted the strange object while browsing Gigapan, a website that features high-resolution photos taken by NASA on Mars.

The photo that caught Waring’s attention was taken by NASA’s Curiosity rover on SOL 346, which is equivalent to July 27, 2013 on Earth. According to the details of the photo, the image was taken while the rover was exploring a region on Mars known as Elsie Mountain.

As Waring was going through the photo, he came across a cluster of large rocks sticking out from the surface. According to the UFO expert, the rocks could be relics that came from an ancient alien civilization that one lived on Mars. According to Waring, one of the alleged relics was a pyramid that has four sides.

“The pyramid has four sides and perfectly balanced on each side,” he stated in a blog post. “It has sunk into the sands over time and one side of the pyramid is deep under the dirt, but we can still see its magnificent detail.”

Behind the alleged pyramid are massive objects that Waring referred to as sculptures of heads. Waring came to this conclusion after identifying several features of the sculptures, such as the nose, ear, eyes and cheeks.
Waring believes that similar to the Egyptian pyramids and statues of pharaohs on Earth, the alleged sculptures he spotted on the photo depicted the ancient Martian culture of the Red Planet.

Not an example of "bad science".
1. Not reported under the science section. (The Express doesn't even have a science section.)
2. The reporting is accurate. Waring really did publish an article with his interpretations of the Mars photos.
3. The article doesn't make Waring's interpretations its own.

 

[shunyadragon]

Prolly a bad idea

Just added a new word to my vocabulary!

 

[shunyadragon]

Not an example of "bad science".
1. Not reported under the science section. (The Express doesn't even have a science section.)
2. The reporting is accurate. Waring really did publish an article with his interpretations of the Mars photos.
3. The article doesn't make Waring's interpretations its own.

Well . . . not having a science section does not prevent express co. from publishing bad science articles. They dodge the responsibility of support by making third party neutral statements Other sources that covered this did a better more objective coverage.

 

[Deeje]

I think I got off on the wrong foot in this one. So let me go back and compliment you on asking @shunyadragon for evidence. That was the right way to go and my flippant answer was not.

I think that our reactions to people are often clouded by our perceptions of them.....the anonymity of the internet doesn’t exactly allow for correct assumptions about those we connect with, or lock horns with....thanks for the concession anyway.

I should have been more clear in what the evidence is that this article is "bad science". So, to make up leeway, here they are:
1. The article uses unscientific language. Right in the title it talks about aborted babies. You can't abort a baby. You can abort an embryo or a fetus.

I don’t think the article was designed for the scientific community, but for the ordinary folk who respond to ordinary language. Scientific jargon is for people with science degrees or at least some training in its usage.
Personally, I like to read the simple language because you can’t hide behind the jargon. Using simple language often exposes the absurdity that is masked by obscure terminology.

You can abort a “baby” in the third trimester or even at the later stages of the second trimester.....which is so ironic when doctors will abort and offer no life support for an unwanted “baby” (a viable life outside the womb) and then take extraordinary measures to save a “baby” (equally viable) born too early. An embryo becomes a foetus and a foetus becomes a “baby” once it breathes...but when is it a “life”?
This all happens in around 40 weeks. Not much of a time frame when you are describing the development of someone’s life....is it? When is this “life” not a “baby” to its parents?

2. It uses speculation and outdated information. We don't know how effective the vaccine will be and there is no reason to assume that the efficacy will be as low as with the yearly influenza shots. Mercury and other metals haven't been used as preservatives for years where cooling was available.

Your faith in the medical system is duly noted.....I don’t have your faith, based on its track record. Adjuvants in vaccinations are not the only concern to me. The fact that science understands the difficulty of making vaccines that they already know may force organisms to adapt and become stronger and more resistant to the point where medical science will no longer have anything to offer as a prevention or treatment, is a very real possibility.

The other point which does not seem to get discussed is the difference between vaccination and immunisation. Why is it that when a person gets an illness and acquires a natural immunity through the body’s production of antibodies, that these antibodies remain and will ensure that the person remains immune for life? But vaccination requires booster shots? If it’s a true immunisation, then booster shots should not be necessary.

Why is there a “Vaccination Injury Compensation Scheme” if vaccinations are so safe? Why have they paid out over $4 billion to parents of children who are permanently brain damaged or who have lost their life due to a vaccination that went horribly wrong?

Does medical science really know what has caused the devastating epidemic of autism, which to all intents and purposes has grown with the increasing program of vaccinations. Despite the protestations, I am not convinced that this is a coincidence.

3. It doesn't add new information. Stem cells have been used in research for over 50 years. The cell line HEK-293 itself is almost 50 years old. (And we don't know the reason for the abortion. It could have been to save the mothers life.)
4. It doesn't discuss the pros and cons of using stem cells. If the use of stem cells could make the vaccine more save or produced earlier, it could save tens of thousands of lives. That puts the use of a stem cell that already exists for 48 years in perspective.

Stem cells harvested from aborted foetuses is an ethical and moral problem for me. I have no issues with the use of stem cells at all....in fact, I believe that the success rates in stem cell therapies (using one’s own stem cells) in reducing the need for joint replacement surgery is being suppressed. The medical profession has kept so many effective natural therapies under suppression just so they can keep making money out of their less successful and much more painful surgeries and drug therapies.

Medical science would rather still employ devastating chemotherapy and radiation, with an incredibly low success rate but demonized the use of medicinal cannabis as a treatment and a well documented cure for many who were condemned to death by that system. What are we seeing now? Big Pharma, who was responsible for the propaganda used to keep cannabis classified as a dangerous drug for decades, want to profit from it now that the truth is out. Don’t you smell a rat?

You can’t patent a plant so they have to synthesise components of plants so that they can profit off its use. Cannabis works best as s a whole plant medicine. It is not dangerous and never was.....is it open to abuse? Of course, just like alcohol, tobacco and caffeine....but the major difference is that cannabis has no dangerous side effects and it is not addictive. No one knew this for 70 years because they believed the drug barons who lied through their teeth about this medicine, and influenced politicians to make laws making its use a criminal offence. It has been used for thousands of years in many different cultures all over the world.
And you trust them?

Your faith in that corrupt system is not shared by me....for many obvious reasons.

 

[Heyo]

I think that our reactions to people are often clouded by our perceptions of them.....the anonymity of the internet doesn’t exactly allow for correct assumptions about those we connect with, or lock horns with....thanks for the concession anyway.



I don’t think the article was designed for the scientific community, but for the ordinary folk who respond to ordinary language. Scientific jargon is for people with science degrees or at least some training in its usage.
Personally, I like to read the simple language because you can’t hide behind the jargon. Using simple language often exposes the absurdity that is masked by obscure terminology.

You can abort a “baby” in the third trimester or even at the later stages of the second trimester.....which is so ironic when doctors will abort and offer no life support for an unwanted “baby” (a viable life outside the womb) and then take extraordinary measures to save a “baby” (equally viable) born too early. An embryo becomes a foetus and a foetus becomes a “baby” once it breathes...but when is it a “life”?
This all happens in around 40 weeks. Not much of a time frame when you are describing the development of someone’s life....is it? When is this “life” not a “baby” to its parents?



Your faith in the medical system is duly noted.....I don’t have your faith, based on its track record. Adjuvants in vaccinations are not the only concern to me. The fact that science understands the difficulty of making vaccines that they already know may force organisms to adapt and become stronger and more resistant to the point where medical science will no longer have anything to offer as a prevention or treatment, is a very real possibility.

The other point which does not seem to get discussed is the difference between vaccination and immunisation. Why is it that when a person gets an illness and acquires a natural immunity through the body’s production of antibodies, that these antibodies remain and will ensure that the person remains immune for life? But vaccination requires booster shots? If it’s a true immunisation, then booster shots should not be necessary.

Why is there a “Vaccination Injury Compensation Scheme” if vaccinations are so safe? Why have they paid out over $4 billion to parents of children who are permanently brain damaged or who have lost their life due to a vaccination that went horribly wrong?

Does medical science really know what has caused the devastating epidemic of autism, which to all intents and purposes has grown with the increasing program of vaccinations. Despite the protestations, I am not convinced that this is a coincidence.



Stem cells harvested from aborted foetuses is an ethical and moral problem for me. I have no issues with the use of stem cells at all....in fact, I believe that the success rates in stem cell therapies (using one’s own stem cells) in reducing the need for joint replacement surgery is being suppressed. The medical profession has kept so many effective natural therapies under suppression just so they can keep making money out of their less successful and much more painful surgeries and drug therapies.

Medical science would rather still employ devastating chemotherapy and radiation, with an incredibly low success rate but demonized the use of medicinal cannabis as a treatment and a well documented cure for many who were condemned to death by that system. What are we seeing now? Big Pharma, who was responsible for the propaganda used to keep cannabis classified as a dangerous drug for decades, want to profit from it now that the truth is out. Don’t you smell a rat?

You can’t patent a plant so they have to synthesise components of plants so that they can profit off its use. Cannabis works best as s a whole plant medicine. It is not dangerous and never was.....is it open to abuse? Of course, just like alcohol, tobacco and caffeine....but the major difference is that cannabis has no dangerous side effects and it is not addictive. No one knew this for 70 years because they believed the drug barons who lied through their teeth about this medicine, and influenced politicians to make laws making its use a criminal offence. It has been used for thousands of years in many different cultures all over the world.
And you trust them?

Your faith will in that corrupt system is not shared by me....for many obvious reasons.

Just a short note on a long text as all this is off topic in a thread about "bad science".
I don't trust for-profit pharmaceutical corporations. I don't fully trust government organisations to supervise the pharmaceutical corporations (but more than the corporations). I do trust the science. The real science I find in scientific journals, not the one interpreted by editors of boulevard magazines.

 

[Deeje]

Just a short note on a long text as all this is off topic in a thread about "bad science".
I don't trust for-profit pharmaceutical corporations. I don't fully trust government organisations to supervise the pharmaceutical corporations (but more than the corporations). I do trust the science. The real science I find in scientific journals, not the one interpreted by editors of boulevard magazines.

1) I was answering your points....as you should know by now, I think that details are important.
Give me a platform and I will use it.

2) The whole post was about my idea of bad science.....you may have your own ideas.
Not off topic at all really.