Monday, October 10, 2011

Random questionable ideas -2

I have learned to question anything that is said with authority but without substantial reason to think the speaker knows what he's talking about.  A current Republican presidential candidate was shown on a talk show recently saying, "I don't have the facts to back me up on this but ..." and he continued with his speculation about something.  It didn't really matter because he had already chopped the legs off his own argument. Scientists generally rate pretty high on my list of people who know what they are talking about but the class I'm taking this semester may be undermining that.  On the other hand, the strange things I'm hearing may be a result of my hearing loss rather than his statements.  In any case, here are the questionable statements I heard in the latest classes:

  1. Writing by hand (especially cursive) involves the fine motor skills and is therefore an emotional exercise   Keyboarding with a typewriter or computer keyboard is not emotionally engaging.
  2. The brain does not learn better by making exercises "fun".  The brain learns solely through repetition.
  3. Neanderthals actually had larger brains than early humans but lost out in the evolutionary struggle because they were unable to form the social groups that early humans did.
  4. Human brains have shrunk in the past 500 years indicating a possible evolutionary trend.
  5. The  pointedness of dogs' ears correlates with their wildness.  The more pointy, the less they are domesticated.
  6. The incidence of Down syndrome children correlates with the age of the father more than with the age of the mother.
What about it?  Anyone out there feel like taking one or more of these statements and find "facts" to either back up or refute the statement?

4 comments:

  1. I think that I have heard about number 6 before. But that might have something more to do with the fact that men can father children longer (indefinitely) than women can bear children (until menopause)than any other difference between men and women.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I believe I have seen all of these in some form of published popular scientific literature before, but they are not uncontested theories. A single study/publication does not make truth, even if it is written up in a nice easy soundbite. Which is what these sound like to me.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I liked when wait wait don't tell me quoted that about 35% of new medical studies turn out to be wrong. Of course, if you only require 1 standard deviation to publish, then that is almost exactly what you would expect.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Is that statistic among the population of scientific studies that is 35% likely to be wrong? (I sense an infinite loop coming on.)

    ReplyDelete