Basically, it's Deep Thoughts by Jack Handey repurposed for an observation about science.
-
-
Show this threadThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Surely the slightest critical examination would convert its zeigeist from pseudoprofound to metaprofound? Or am I being too ontologically unrestricted here?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
I think she's trying to be funny.
-
You might be right.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
It’s a joke. I don’t know that it’s a good one
-
Read her Tweet that follows. It gives the game away.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
I think the most profound statement comes from stats and should repel the “pure science” types, and that is we must rember all models are wrong but some are useful. These are all models, nothing is a perfect approximation, even our senses. Doesn’t mean they’re not useful.
-
Each of our model understandings fits the data in some places and often not in others. We keep revising and honing them so they remain useful(predictive), and more closely approximate reality but we should never delude ourself that they are “right”.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
The Deepak Chopra effect.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.

