One of my biggest pet peeves, absolute science no-no, red alert, alarm bell, bad sign™ is non-modellers incessantly insisting — condescendingly! — on implementation or model details they know nothing about & which are demonstrably wrong. This kills meaningful collaboration. 
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Can you give an example? It'd be good as counter-example to comp models as a communication/rhetoric tool (which I think is one of 3 reasons for comp models: https://egtheory.wordpress.com/2013/12/19/computational-models/ …). If it lets people Dunning-Kruger too much then maybe it isn't as good of a comm tool as I thought
-
See the other replies in this thread!
-
There are possibly more already there but I am not convinced that they argue that modelling isn't a good pedagogical tool. Can you elaborate what you are thinking? CC:
@IrisVanRooij@twitemp1 -
PS: I haven't read your blog post yet — sorry! Will try to soon.
- 2 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
And/or they send you an “idea” and ask you to model it in a couple of days to be added to a “joint” grant proposal

-
We have identical experiences!

-
It's almost as if they don't respect modelling, theoretical work, or the time it takes to understand something enough to model it.

-
Theory is " just thinking".
-
Modelling is "just outsourcing your thinking to a machine."

-
Theoretical Physics is "just thinking on paper".

-
If only some (ppl) would try and think
-
"What do you mean I have to think? That's why I have you!?"
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
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.