Scientists are idiots
 

http://www.msnbc.com/news/788203.asp

"?ANIMAL BEHAVIORISTS USED to think their bark was simply a way of getting attention. Now a new study suggests that individual dogs have specific barks with a range of meanings,? New Scientist magazine said on Wednesday.
Dogs usually use high-pitched single barks when they are separated from their owners and a lower, harsher superbark when strangers approach or the doorbell rings, according to Sophia Yin, an animal behaviorist at the university.
Playful woofs are high-pitched and unevenly spaced."

No shit. Anyone who's had a dog for 2 days knows that dogs have different barks for different situations.

Todays scientists are fucken morons. I'm starting to think the more we educate people the stupider they become.

wow. i hate dogs and even i knew that.

I don't think they have included the yelp a dog gives when Gary brings his loving.

"This just in... dogs will "vomit" when throwing up!"
I hope this study wasn't funded by tax money.

You're the idiot for reading the MSNBC interpretation of a New Scientist article. I'm sure the actual study is a little more detailed than those two paragraphs.

If it wasn't for scientists you'd sitting in the dark in a cave somewhere so show some goddamn appreciation.

Lets send a dog to the moon.
Maybe he'll come back smarter. Hmm, I wonder what would happen if the dog pissed in space and it got into the controls.

*bzzzt, bzzt, snap, pop, crackle, whhherrrrr, poww*
"Houston, we have a problem."

I'd read the actual article, but I'm doing a new study to prove the world isn't flat.

the subject is a "oxymoron"

Damn...you mean it isn't really flat? I am doing a study of why cats meow instead of barking.

In Russia we send dog into space before Amerika send their first monkey.

We even put many dogs on moon, Amerikan cosmonauts had to land on other side of moon to avoid our dogs biting on them.

You forgot to add the smiley icon. Or did you?

why for the smiley icon? this is not story, but great history of the Race in Space with CCCP and USA

This is why Russia is having space station with Amerika helping. Somethink happening to the dogs on the moon that it is no longer safe to be going to there. So now we build apartments in space where the dogs will not be bothering to anyone . . . no dogs are allowed this time.

Goddab -- my dog now wishes to visit moon. How I go about this? He does not bark much, but he shits like no tomorrow.


And, will he be paid in rubles?

Russia is now very poor as result the fall of the soviet republic. To send dog to the moon is possible no more. I am thinking if sending your dog to Russia he will soon be sold on black market to gypsy family that will serve him for a great feast for family holiday

Apologies...... my dog is wanting to visit moon in Russian rocket no more. Thankfully, we have not many of the gypsies here in Canada, since he is now afraid of them.


But his coat would bring great price, yes?

what kind of a coat are you buying for your dog? we are a poor peoples in all of Russian states, and my country of Latvia. One must be very wealthy to buy a coat for their dog and I am never hearing of such a think before.

I have heard Canada to be very cold, we are very cold country also. I am thinking Canada must be roads of gold if they buying coats for the dogs. do you have pictures as I have told this to my mother, and she is laughing and says you are pulling the wool of many sheep over my eyes

is this true?

:1orglaugh :1orglaugh :1orglaugh :1orglaugh :1orglaugh

This guy made my day

I also read that article and thought it was very poor, FATPad. The intro paragraph is a direct quote from the New Scientist article.

There is a lot of "bad science" out there. What I mean is, there are a lot of studies that are published that don't use proper control groups or perform a poor statistical analysis, especially in the social sciences. Many times, overgeneralized conclusions are drawn.

This is different than tentative hypotheses presented for peer review in a journal. A researcher publishes and argues best for their case. One would hope they would present the best arguments against it or point out it's weaknesses but this is often not so.

Fortunately, science as a system of coming to understand the world works. The system depends heavily on peer review and everything one ever publishes is forever scrutinized. The success of science is just so staggeringly clear it does not need to be expounded upon.

Despite poor research methods by many scientists and the inherent flaws of any one individual, the overall philosophy and method of science has been spectacularly successful.

What has been more so?

I am using three cats in my "control group" in my study of why cats meow and do not bark like dogs. Is this a sufficient number of cats in the control group or will it make for "bad science"?

Pathfinder,

That is funny but it is also interesting. If you know nothing about cats (you are an alien visiting earth), then the answer is clearly no. The minimum number of subjects required in an all or nothing response for statistical significance is about 7 patients, even if for example every cat meowed and every dog barked (or whatever).

Your post sounds funny because you already know cats meow. Your sample size is huge. Every cat you've ever seen.


---------------------------------
So anyway, say you have a group of 7 people in a wonder-drug study and 7 in a placebo group (control group). All 14 are terminally ill and are expected to die within a month. A month goes by and the 7 given the wonder-drug live and the 7 given a placebo die. This is the minimal study size and control group necessary to be "statistically significant". If one of those 7 that lived died or one of the ones that died lived, it would actually not be significant yet. You would need more data.

Komrade goddab --

I did not buy coat for dog, you misunderstand comments. What are you, a former child prodigy? Dog has worn coat since birth! Maybe I should have used word like "pelt", yes? Dog is old, I keep him mostly indoors now. He has no need for pelt. It would fetch a good price on Russian pelt market, yes?

Of course everyone knows Canada has roads of gold. Why you think we have so many potholes?

I am thinking you will sell the fur of your dog, but will not allow gypsy family to feast on him? This is making no sense to me. To shave the dog and save fur takes much time to glue on the hide of another animal. If you will to skin the dog to make proper coat, you should eat the meat as no sense to throw away.

What size dog do you own? I am thinking he would make better gloves than overcoat. We are poor peoples but not ignorant. Sable and yak are much better for cold Russian winter. I think I have seen gypsy use dog pelt to patch torn tent or wagon coverings. At time I have to seen back packing that may be from wolf which is much like big dog

Do people dig the gold from the roads in Canada? I am thinking I must go there before I go to Amerika to make Nina my wife. New York, New York is not far from Canada I am thinking. If I have pockets of gold maybe Nina marry me with big smile. Then we both smile.