Subscribe to our free Weekly Newsletter for articles and videos on practical mathematics, Internet Censorship, ways to fight back against censorship, and other topics by sending an email to: subscribe [at] mathematical-software.com
John F. McGowan, Ph.D. solves problems using mathematics and mathematical software, including developing gesture recognition for touch devices, video compression and speech recognition technologies. He has extensive experience developing software in C, C++, MATLAB, Python, Visual Basic and many other programming languages. He has been a Visiting Scholar at HP Labs developing computer vision algorithms and software for mobile devices. He has worked as a contractor at NASA Ames Research Center involved in the research and development of image and video processing algorithms and technology. He has published articles on the origin and evolution of life, the exploration of Mars (anticipating the discovery of methane on Mars), and cheap access to space. He has a Ph.D. in physics from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign and a B.S. in physics from the California Institute of Technology (Caltech).
Why Listen to this video? There are many heavily promoted dangerous misconceptions about modern “science,” many of which I once shared. These misconceptions generally lead to an excessive and dangerous confidence in scientists and claims labeled as science. These can even cost you your life as happened to many arthritis sufferers who trusted scientific claims about the blockbuster painkiller Vioxx. Many other examples exist, some discussed briefly in the following video. I will discuss over a dozen common misconceptions. The discussion reflects my personal experience and research.
Why me? I have a B.S. in Physics from Caltech, a Ph.D. in experimental particle physics from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, worked for a successful video compression startup in the Silicon Valley, NASA, HP Labs, and Apple.
TOPICS COVERED
Scientists are people too. Rarely the altruistic truth-seekers depicted in fiction and popular science writing. Egos, glory, greed. Comparable to less revered and even actively distrusted professions such as attorneys. Many examples of error and gross misconduct up to the present day: “Tuskegee Study of Untreated Syphilis the Negro Male” by US Public Health Service and US Centers for Disease Control (1932-1972), Eugenics, Vioxx scandal.
In her 2009 article “Drug Companies & Doctors: A Story of Corruption”, published in The New York Review of Books magazine, (former NEJM Editor-in-Chief Marcia) Angell wrote :[7]
…Similar conflicts of interest and biases exist in virtually every field of medicine, particularly those that rely heavily on drugs or devices. It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines. I take no pleasure in this conclusion, which I reached slowly and reluctantly over my two decades as an editor of The New England Journal of Medicine.
Moral character and intelligence (IQ, general intelligence) are uncorrelated.
Since World War II most modern science is funded by the government, by giant bureaucratic funding agencies such as the National Institutes of Health, the National Science Foundation, the Department of Energy, and the DoD in the USA. There was a large transformation of science during and after World War II from small scale, often more independent research to huge government programs.
(Video segment from Eisenhower’s Farewell Address on the danger of the scientific technological elite)
The success of the wartime Manhattan Project which developed the first nuclear reactors and atomic bombs appears to have been a fluke. Most New Manhattan Projects have largely or completely failed including several in physics involving the same people or their students.
There is an illusion of independence in scientists because so many are directly employed by universities such as Harvard, Stanford, Caltech and others, but those universities depend mostly on government funding. High profile academic dissidents such as linguist Noam Chomsky usually stay well away from truly taboo topics often labeled as “conspiracy theories,” e.g. the Kennedy Assassination, “pseudoscience,” or both.
The federally funded academic research system is a pyramid scheme with many, many more Ph.D.’s produced than long term faculty or staff positions, typically 5-20 times more Ph.D.s. Remarkably, leading scientists and scientific institutions continue to claim terrible shortages of scientists despite this. A never ending supply of young, cheap, often starry-eyed workers — graduate students and post-docs.
A well-paid but precarious elite of tenured faculty, principal investigators, senior scientists at government labs who can easily be replaced by a tiny fraction of the younger Ph.D’s if they rock the boat.
Brilliant, well-educated, hard working people sometimes do dumb things, both individually and collectively.
Knowledge of cognitive biases such as “confirmation bias” or “cognitive dissonance” does not immunize people from the biases.
Brilliant, well-educated, hard working people are often better at rationalizing away obviously contradictory evidence or logic and convincing others to accept their rationalizations. Paradoxically knowledge of cognitive biases provides an arsenal of excuses to rationalize away the evidence or logic.
The heavily promoted popular concept of “falsifiability,” usually attributed to Karl Popper, does not work in practice. Scientists can usually (not always) find technically plausible, sophisticated “explanations” for supposedly falsifying evidence. A double standard that sets an impossible obstacle for deprecated views.
The scientific uncertainty excuse. Scientists often make confident statements claiming or implying no or negligible uncertainty. When the statement proves wrong, they will ridicule critics by claiming science is tentative, an ever evolving process, there is an 80-90% failure rate in science, there is uncertainty they never mentioned and by implication everyone should know that. Once the criticism is beaten back often by this ridicule they revert to more confident statements, sometimes grossly contradicting the previous statement.
Modern scientists make heavy use of complex, error-prone, usually computerized mathematical models and advanced statistical methods that are difficult to reproduce or criticize. These methods are prone to finding small signals that rarely exceed the normal variation of the data when small mistakes are made, whether innocently, due to subconscious bias, or intentionally.
The error rate of top science students in school, college, university, academic settings is very low, possibly zero percent for some top students (800 on SAT, a few top students at Caltech, MIT etc.). BUT this does not translate to real world R&D where failure rates are clearly much higher. Scientists selectively cite a failure rate of 80-90 percent when confronted about obvious falures (cost and schedule overruns, failed cancer breakthroughs etc.)
Prodigies/highly successful scientists (tenured faculty etc.) frequently have unusual family backgrounds such as extremely wealthy, politically connected families or an often prominent academic family. Parents know calculus which is a significant hurdle for most “nerds.” Not like Good Will Hunting or The Big Bang Theory where prodigies are portrayed as working class, poor etc. Purely genetic fluke implied.
“Science” (in scare quotes) is promoted by scientists as a religion or substitute for religion, a comprehensive “rational” worldview demanding fealty and paradoxically irrational “rational” obeisance. Extreme examples include the use of the term “God Particle” for the Higgs particle in particle physics, promoted by the late Nobel Laureate Leon Lederman and others. Carl Sagan’s inaccurate account of the destruction of the Library of Alexandria and murder of Hypatia in Cosmos. Often closely tied to militant atheism and materialism despite the strong use of religious and mystical terms and ideas at the same time. Organized skeptics such as CSI/CSICOP, Michael Shermer and others. Dissenting or differing points of view are labeled as anti-science, conspiracy theories, pseudoscience, denialism and other labels.
Carl Sagan, Neil deGrasse Tyson and Hypatia (Debunked):
Conclusion: I’ve discussed over a dozen major heavily promoted, dangerous misconceptions about “science.” If you find some of these hard to accept, perform your own research. I have numerous articles on the false scientist shortage claims, also known as STEM shortage claims, on my web site. I also have articles on the Manhattan Project as a fluke and the Myth of Falsifiability. I will likely post more supporting information on the other misconceptions in the future. Most importantly, true science requires thinking carefully and critically for yourself and not treating something labeled “science” as a religion or substitute for religion, either consciously or subconsciously.
Subscribe to our free Weekly Newsletter for articles and videos on practical mathematics, Internet Censorship, ways to fight back against censorship, and other topics by sending an email to: subscribe [at] mathematical-software.com
John F. McGowan, Ph.D. solves problems using mathematics and mathematical software, including developing gesture recognition for touch devices, video compression and speech recognition technologies. He has extensive experience developing software in C, C++, MATLAB, Python, Visual Basic and many other programming languages. He has been a Visiting Scholar at HP Labs developing computer vision algorithms and software for mobile devices. He has worked as a contractor at NASA Ames Research Center involved in the research and development of image and video processing algorithms and technology. He has published articles on the origin and evolution of life, the exploration of Mars (anticipating the discovery of methane on Mars), and cheap access to space. He has a Ph.D. in physics from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign and a B.S. in physics from the California Institute of Technology (Caltech).
John F. McGowan, Ph.D. solves problems using mathematics and mathematical software, including developing gesture recognition for touch devices, video compression and speech recognition technologies. He has extensive experience developing software in C, C++, MATLAB, Python, Visual Basic and many other programming languages. He has been a Visiting Scholar at HP Labs developing computer vision algorithms and software for mobile devices. He has worked as a contractor at NASA Ames Research Center involved in the research and development of image and video processing algorithms and technology. He has published articles on the origin and evolution of life, the exploration of Mars (anticipating the discovery of methane on Mars), and cheap access to space. He has a Ph.D. in physics from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign and a B.S. in physics from the California Institute of Technology (Caltech).
This is a video showing the CDC Cold vs Flu web page on April 16, 2020 shortly after I published my “Uncounted COVID Deaths? The CDC’s Contradictory Pneumonia and Influenza Death Numbers” where I discussed the contradictory language and claims on the CDC’s Cold vs Flu web page. The video was recorded to support further my discussion in the Uncounted COVID article/presentation and because I think it likely the web page will change as the CDC fields hard questions about its Influenza and Pneumonia web pages, reports, and other documentation.
Astonishingly the CDC gives two radically different numbers of deaths from pneumonia and influenza: about 55,000 “influenza and pneumonia” deaths in the leading causes of death table in the “Final Deaths” report for 2017, the latest year available, and about 188,000 in data on weekly “pneumonia and influenza” deaths, over THREE TIMES the leading causes of death number.
John F. McGowan, Ph.D. solves problems using mathematics and mathematical software, including developing gesture recognition for touch devices, video compression and speech recognition technologies. He has extensive experience developing software in C, C++, MATLAB, Python, Visual Basic and many other programming languages. He has been a Visiting Scholar at HP Labs developing computer vision algorithms and software for mobile devices. He has worked as a contractor at NASA Ames Research Center involved in the research and development of image and video processing algorithms and technology. He has published articles on the origin and evolution of life, the exploration of Mars (anticipating the discovery of methane on Mars), and cheap access to space. He has a Ph.D. in physics from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign and a B.S. in physics from the California Institute of Technology (Caltech).
I have added a video showing the CDC Pneumonia and Influenza Weekly Deaths web site as it is (was) on April 15, 2020. In this video I show the different web site sections I have discussed, download theNCHSData14.csvweekly deaths data file, go through the analysis briefly in a spreadsheet, and show the difference between the numbers in 2017 in the file and the Final Death (Leading Causes of Deaths) numbers in 2017.
The weekly pneumonia and influenza deaths data shows fewer deaths in weeks one through thirteen, the latest week in the file ending March 28, 2020, than in the comparable weeks in 2019 — last year. This despite the COVID-19 pandemic, lack of testing in the United States, asymptomatic carriers, and other issues.
The weekly pneumonia and influenza deaths data also show about 188,000 deaths from pneumonia and influenza in 2017, over THREE TIMES the about 55,000 deaths listed as “influenza and pneumonia” in the 2017 leading causes of death.
NOTE: If you are concerned about these odd numbers, please consider sharing the original post and/or this one by e-mail, a link on your web site or blog, or other methods in addition to advertising-funded and other big company social media. My original post of this on Hacker News soared for a few hours and then was flagged and shut down, for example. I have also encountered social media mobs that engage in name calling and do not address the substantive issues.
CDC Web Site Video
It seems likely to me that the CDC web site will change in response to questions about the confusing numbers and language. Hopefully, the CDC will clarify the language and numbers in an open, “transparent,” and genuinely honest way that survives critical scrutiny. Especially given the life and death situation.
John F. McGowan, Ph.D. solves problems using mathematics and mathematical software, including developing gesture recognition for touch devices, video compression and speech recognition technologies. He has extensive experience developing software in C, C++, MATLAB, Python, Visual Basic and many other programming languages. He has been a Visiting Scholar at HP Labs developing computer vision algorithms and software for mobile devices. He has worked as a contractor at NASA Ames Research Center involved in the research and development of image and video processing algorithms and technology. He has published articles on the origin and evolution of life, the exploration of Mars (anticipating the discovery of methane on Mars), and cheap access to space. He has a Ph.D. in physics from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign and a B.S. in physics from the California Institute of Technology (Caltech).
This presentation discusses the CDC’s contradictory weekly and annual pneumonia and influenza deaths. Even the latest (as of April 14, 2020) weekly death numbers show fewer deaths in 2020 than comparable weeks last year (2019) despite the Coronavirus COVID-19 pandemic. Given asymptomatic carriers and inadequate testing in the United States, one would expect a surge in reported pneumonia and influenza deaths.
Remarkably summing the weekly pnemonia and influenza deaths gives about 180,000 annual deaths from pneumonia and influenza, over THREE TIMES the widely cited 55,000 “influenza and pneumonia” deaths from the annual leading causes of death report.
These numbers raise troubling questions about the CDC and its collection, analysis and reporting of pneumonia and influenza numbers. The low number of weekly deaths compared to last year could indicate that there may be many uncounted COVID deaths, or that the disease is much less deadly than popular reports, or several other possibilities with substantially different public health implications. The numbers need to be clarified as soon as possible.
Both a video version and a written PDF version are provided below. The written version is generally faster to read and includes references and some additional technical details.
NOTE: If you are concerned about these odd numbers, please consider sharing this post by e-mail, a link on your web site or blog, or other methods in addition to advertising-funded and other big company social media. My post of this on Hacker News soared for a few hours and then was flagged and shut down, for example. I have also encountered social media mobs that engage in name calling and do not address the substantive issues.
Video Presentation
Uncounted COVID Deaths? The CDC’s Contradictory Pneumonia and Influenza Death Numbers
John F. McGowan, Ph.D. solves problems using mathematics and mathematical software, including developing gesture recognition for touch devices, video compression and speech recognition technologies. He has extensive experience developing software in C, C++, MATLAB, Python, Visual Basic and many other programming languages. He has been a Visiting Scholar at HP Labs developing computer vision algorithms and software for mobile devices. He has worked as a contractor at NASA Ames Research Center involved in the research and development of image and video processing algorithms and technology. He has published articles on the origin and evolution of life, the exploration of Mars (anticipating the discovery of methane on Mars), and cheap access to space. He has a Ph.D. in physics from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign and a B.S. in physics from the California Institute of Technology (Caltech).
Is that COVID-19 model true? An intro to quantitative falsifiability metrics for confirming the safety and effectiveness of drugs and medical treatments, the reliability of mathematical models used in complex derivative securities and other practical applications. It starts with a discussion of the myth of falsifiability, a commonly cited doctrine often used to exclude certain points of view and evidence from consideration as “not scientific”. It discusses the glaring problems with the popular versions of this doctrine and the lack of a rigorous quantitative formulation of a more nuanced concept of falsifiability as originally proposed, but not developed, by the philosopher Karl Popper. The video concludes with a brief accessible presentation of our work on rigorous quantitative falsifiability metrics for practical science and engineering.
It is generally faster to read the article than watch the video.
(C) 2020 by John F. McGowan, Ph.D.
About Me
John F. McGowan, Ph.D. solves problems using mathematics and mathematical software, including developing gesture recognition for touch devices, video compression and speech recognition technologies. He has extensive experience developing software in C, C++, MATLAB, Python, Visual Basic and many other programming languages. He has been a Visiting Scholar at HP Labs developing computer vision algorithms and software for mobile devices. He has worked as a contractor at NASA Ames Research Center involved in the research and development of image and video processing algorithms and technology. He has published articles on the origin and evolution of life, the exploration of Mars (anticipating the discovery of methane on Mars), and cheap access to space. He has a Ph.D. in physics from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign and a B.S. in physics from the California Institute of Technology (Caltech).
