cargo cult science造句

• Critics would likely label this work Cargo cult science.
• Cargo Cult Science ) are also in use.
• An example of cargo cult science is an experiment that uses another researcher's results in lieu of an experimental control.
• The closing chapter, " Cargo Cult Science, " is adapted from the address that Feynman gave during the 1974 commencement exercises at the California Institute of Technology.
• Because of the inherent lack of experimental falsifiability in exploratory engineering, its practitioners must take particular care to avoid falling into practices analogous to cargo cult science, pseudoscience, and pathological science.
• By its standard practices of applying good scientific methods, mainstream is distinguished from pseudoscience as a demarcation problem and specific types of inquiry are debunked as junk science, cargo cult science, scientific misconduct, etc.
• Stigmatize it so it may be ridiculed and dismissed without fair consideration and without their needing to leave the political-emotional-beliefs mental state . ) And shouldn't we be deleting " Cargo Cult Science " too?
• I also think this particular form of the expression may be fairly deemed a colloquialism-however, the principle of Cargo cult science is important, and I see evidence that Fermi's Napkin is being merged with Feynman's Benjamin Gatti 02 : 03, 17 April 2006 ( UTC)
• In 1974, Feynman delivered the Caltech commencement address on the topic of " cargo cult science ", which has the semblance of science, but is only pseudoscience due to a lack of " a kind of scientific integrity, a principle of scientific thought that corresponds to a kind of utter honesty " on the part of the scientist.
• The metaphorical use of " cargo cult " was popularized by physicist Richard Feynman at a 1974 Caltech commencement speech, which later became a chapter in his book " Surely You're Joking, Mr . Feynman ! ", where he coined the phrase " cargo cult science " to describe activity that had some of the trappings of real science ( such as publication in scientific journals ) but lacked a basis in honest experimentation.
• They describe about a third of those savings as " statistically insignificant " . . . and with all of the other horrible things that happened to those 8 people during their weird " experiment ", I could believe they were screwed up in so many other ways as to make any conclusions utterly invalid . . . so meh . . . not " cargo cult science "-it's " very, very bad science " and with conclusions that have zero bearing on the question at hand here.