| Title | Former Microsoft Chief Technologist Criticizes NASA | |
| Date | Saturday May 28 2016, @10:03AM | |
| Author | cmn32480 | |
| Topic | ||
| from the think-before-you-criticize dept. | ||
As a return to our topic of why business persons are not in charge of science, we have the most recent contribution of one Nathan Myhrvold:
Before joining Microsoft, Nathan was a postdoctoral fellow in the department of applied mathematics and theoretical physics at Cambridge University, and he worked with Professor Stephen Hawking. He earned a doctorate in theoretical and mathematical physics and a master's degree in mathematical economics from Princeton University, and he also has a master's degree in geophysics and space physics and a bachelor's degree in mathematics from UCLA. [ http://www.nathanmyhrvold.com/index.php/about ]
Sounds legit! But now, according to the Christian Science Monitor, he is going after the "NEOWISE results in a paper submitted to the journal Icarus and published online ahead of review, says that the WISE and NEOWISE research is filled with errors."
Christian Science Monitor http://www.csmonitor.com/Science/2016/0524/Bad-science-Former-Microsoft-exec-criticizes-NASA-asteroid-data
Now this may be the case, I am not one to judge, since I am not a rocket scientist, I am only the Greek philosopher who came up with the Heliocentric model of the Universe, but there is a lot of criticism, especially about the release of the paper before peer-evaluation was done (better than National Review, but not much.) One actual scientist says:
One error is that Myhrvold mixes up diameter and radius in one of his formulas, says Amy Mainzer, the principal investigator for NEOWISE at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, Calif.
Now the point of this submission is not so much that it is news, but that it represents a trend, a trend of wealthy non-experts feeling entitled to critique actual science. With Anthropogenic Global Warming, there are obvious conflicts of interest to be drawn. But in this, and other similar cases, we just have to wonder if it is not a case of "if I am so rich, I must be smart!" The usual retort is, "If you are so smart, why aren't you rich?". But I really think we need to start asking, "If you are so rich, why aren't you smart?"
Washington Post version here: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/speaking-of-science/wp/2016/05/25/that-study-critiquing-nasas-bad-science-on-asteroids-is-pretty-bad-science/
| Links |
printed from SoylentNews, Former Microsoft Chief Technologist Criticizes NASA on 2024-04-20 01:57:33