Flying Ship and the Superior Mirage - Revision history

Uadmin: /* An original problem of expertise leading to wrong science */

2022-06-05T09:04:35Z

‎An original problem of expertise leading to wrong science

Uadmin: /* An original problem of expertise leading to wrong science */

2022-06-05T08:55:44Z

‎An original problem of expertise leading to wrong science

Uadmin: /* An original problem of expertise leading to wrong science */

2022-06-05T08:54:31Z

‎An original problem of expertise leading to wrong science

Uadmin: /* An original problem of expertise leading to wrong science */

2022-06-05T08:52:04Z

‎An original problem of expertise leading to wrong science

Uadmin: /* An original problem of expertise leading to wrong science */

2022-06-05T08:50:40Z

‎An original problem of expertise leading to wrong science

Uadmin: /* An original problem of an expertise leading to wrong science */

2022-06-05T08:50:02Z

‎An original problem of an expertise leading to wrong science

Uadmin: /* An original problem of an expertise leading to wrong science */

2022-05-28T16:17:32Z

‎An original problem of an expertise leading to wrong science

Uadmin at 16:12, 28 mai 2022

2022-05-28T16:12:32Z

Uadmin at 16:12, 28 mai 2022

2022-05-28T16:12:07Z

Uadmin: /* An original problem of an expertise leading to wrong science */

2022-05-28T16:10:05Z

‎An original problem of an expertise leading to wrong science

@@ Ligne 1: / Ligne 1: @@
-===An original problem of expertise leading to wrong science===
+==An original problem of expertise leading to wrong science... ==
 {|
@@ Ligne 11: / Ligne 11: @@
 We should be more conscious that our personal beliefs are our daily driver of our actions and interpretations of the reality.
 These insidious convictions which are telling us when an information is True or when an information is False, because we are human and we cannot verify everything. As a result, we let (naturally) our convictions driving : "some educated people are serious, so what they said is (probably) True".

@@ Ligne 15: / Ligne 15: @@
 The Milgram experiment is the result of this kind of cognitive conditioning.
-Most of people define the reality in this manner, even scientists are subjects to bias <ref>[https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.0020124 Why Most Published Research Findings Are False?]</ref>. Scientific knowledge the information of others scientists, or "well formatted" information (when you respond to the standards of a community you rise your chances to be believed: see [https://slate.com/technology/2014/02/how-nonsense-papers-ended-up-in-respected-scientific-journals.html how nonsense papers can end-up in respected scientific papers].
+Most of people define the reality in this manner, even scientists are subjects to bias <ref>[https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.0020124 Why Most Published Research Findings Are False?]</ref>. Scientific knowledge the information of others scientists, or "well formatted" information (when you respond to the standards of a community you rise your chances to be believed: nonsense papers can end-up in respected scientific journals<ref>[https://slate.com/technology/2014/02/how-nonsense-papers-ended-up-in-respected-scientific-journals.html nonsense papers can end-up in respected scientific journals]</ref>.
 And when most people are saying that something is "True", then it is the whole reality of humans which is redefined.

@@ Ligne 15: / Ligne 15: @@
 The Milgram experiment is the result of this kind of cognitive conditioning.
-Most of people define the reality in this manner, even scientists are subjects to bias <ref>[https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.0020124 Why Most Published Research Findings Are False?]</ref>. Scientific knowledge the information of others scientists, or "well formatted" information (when you respond to the standards of a community you rise your chances to be believed : see how nonsense papers can end up in respected scientific papers: or https://slate.com/.../how-nonsense-papers-ended-up-in... )
+Most of people define the reality in this manner, even scientists are subjects to bias <ref>[https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.0020124 Why Most Published Research Findings Are False?]</ref>. Scientific knowledge the information of others scientists, or "well formatted" information (when you respond to the standards of a community you rise your chances to be believed: see [https://slate.com/technology/2014/02/how-nonsense-papers-ended-up-in-respected-scientific-journals.html how nonsense papers can end-up in respected scientific papers].
 And when most people are saying that something is "True", then it is the whole reality of humans which is redefined.

@@ Ligne 15: / Ligne 15: @@
 The Milgram experiment is the result of this kind of cognitive conditioning.
-Most of people define the reality in this manner, even scientists are subjects to bias (https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.0020124. Scientific knowledge the information of others scientists, or "well formatted" information (when you respond to the standards of a community you rise your chances to be believed : see how nonsense papers can end up in respected scientific papers: or https://slate.com/.../how-nonsense-papers-ended-up-in... )
+Most of people define the reality in this manner, even scientists are subjects to bias <ref>[https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.0020124 Why Most Published Research Findings Are False?]</ref>. Scientific knowledge the information of others scientists, or "well formatted" information (when you respond to the standards of a community you rise your chances to be believed : see how nonsense papers can end up in respected scientific papers: or https://slate.com/.../how-nonsense-papers-ended-up-in... )
 And when most people are saying that something is "True", then it is the whole reality of humans which is redefined.

@@ Ligne 20: / Ligne 20: @@
 Back to our subject: when a meteorologist ("the man of science") say about a viral photo THAT IS a "Fata Morgana" everybody will believe him. Tt will trigger an uncontrollable propagation of this "fake news".
-In fact, who is the man of science for this kind of phenomenon ?
+In fact, who is the man of science for this kind of phenomenon?
 * It is not a meteorologist
@@ Ligne 34: / Ligne 34: @@
 image:photo-analyse-3.2.jpg|The photo in perspective and in a broader field of view. The published photo has been highly zoomed, exaggerating the "flying effect".
 image:map2.jpg|Where exactly was the photograph?
-image:horizon.jpg|Where is the horizon? You can find it by increasing contrast
+image:horizon.jpg|Where REALLY is the horizon? You can find it by increasing contrast
 image:horizon_level.jpg|Where is the horizon? The same, with red arrows.
 </gallery>

← Version précédente		Version du 08:50, 5 juin 2022
Ligne 1:		Ligne 1:
−	===An original problem of an expertise leading to wrong science===	+	===An original problem of expertise leading to wrong science===

	{\|		{\|

← Version précédente		Version du 16:17, 28 mai 2022
Ligne 37:		Ligne 37:
	image:horizon_level.jpg\|Where is the horizon? The same, with red arrows.		image:horizon_level.jpg\|Where is the horizon? The same, with red arrows.
	</gallery>		</gallery>
−	<iframe src="https://www.facebook.com/plugins/post.php?href=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.facebook.com%2Fvaillant.michael%2Fposts%2F10159044503889259&show_text=true&width=500" width="500" height="654" style="border:none;overflow:hidden" scrolling="no" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="true" allow="autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; picture-in-picture; web-share"></iframe>

@@ Ligne 8: / Ligne 8: @@
 The above image is a very good example of a well publicized case with a wrong explanation which went viral: it was explained by the BBC that this photo shows up a [[Superior Looming Mirage]] and this conclusion has been "copied & pasted" by all the medias, even in a scientific publication with their "full" approbation, and it is the worst! In fact, it's what we can call a [[false horizon]].
-Perfect images of boats hovering in the sky are not mirages. Mirages distort and invert images. Even non-mirage refraction effects like looming will not create this effect (as they raise up the water as well as the boat). In fact, we rarely (never) have a mirage without a certain level of distortion or "glitches" in the appearance of the image. And it is because the refraction surface or conditions are never perfect.
+ Perfect images of boats hovering in the sky are not mirages. Mirages distort and invert images. Even non-mirage refraction effects like looming will not create this effect (as they raise up the water as well as the boat). In fact, we rarely (never) have a mirage without a certain level of distortion or "glitches" in the appearance of the image. And it is because the refraction surface or conditions are never perfect.
 We should be more conscious that our personal beliefs are our daily driver of our actions and interpretations of the reality.

@@ Ligne 6: / Ligne 6: @@
 |}
-The above image is a very good example of a well publicized case with a wrong explanation which went viral: the same conclusions were "copied & pasted" by all the medias, even in a scientific publication with their "full" approbation, and it is the worst!
+The above image is a very good example of a well publicized case with a wrong explanation which went viral: it was explained by the BBC that this photo shows up a [[Superior Looming Mirage]] and this conclusion has been "copied & pasted" by all the medias, even in a scientific publication with their "full" approbation, and it is the worst!
 In fact, it's what we can call a "false horizon". The fact is that we rarely (never) have a mirage without a certain level of distortion or "glitches" in the appearance of the image. The refraction surface or conditions are never perfect.