Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site watmath.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!jagardner
From: jagardner@watmath.UUCP (Jim Gardner)
Newsgroups: net.jokes
Subject: Re: "Science made stupid" An incredibly funny book
Message-ID: <16752@watmath.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 9-Oct-85 10:09:02 EDT
Article-I.D.: watmath.16752
Posted: Wed Oct  9 10:09:02 1985
Date-Received: Thu, 10-Oct-85 08:26:02 EDT
References: <1161@sphinx.UChicago.UUCP> <827@vortex.UUCP>
Reply-To: jagardner@watmath.UUCP (Jim Gardner)
Organization: U of Waterloo, Ontario
Lines: 32

In article <827@vortex.UUCP> lauren@vortex.UUCP (Lauren Weinstein) writes:
>Trust me on this gang... check out "Science Made Stupid."
>I wouldn't steer you wrong.
>
>--Lauren--

Yay, Lauren!  Science made stupid is indeed screamingly funny...we
recently left it on the coffee table during a party and people were
howling all night.

And since I should put a joke in this submission, I'll steal from
the book itself.  Early on, in the explanation of what Science is,
the author describes the two different scientific approaches.

Deductive reasoning:
	1. Formulate theory.
	2. Apply for grant.
	3. Conduct experiment to test theory.
	4. Change theory to fit observations.
	5. Backdate changed theory to make it
	   seem as if you expected this all along.
	6. Publish.

Inductive Reasoning:
	1. Formulate theory.
	2. Apply for grant.
	3. Conduct experiment to test theory.
	4. Change observations to match theory.
	5. Publish.

			Jim Gardner, University of Waterloo