Occams Razor http://en.wikipedia.org/occam's_raz...

Question

John,There are 3000 scientists working for G.E on Global warming. If the Kyoto treaty is ratified, G.E. stands to make hundreds and hundreds of billions of dollars from the tech they own that would be used. Whats the problem you say? well G.E. owns all of NBC and its associate channels who are pushing the going green ads, ok? Yet G.E. is also in one of the leading suppliers of equipment and tech to the oil and gas industries. Everytime you see an ad for going green, its an ad for G.E. Global warming is being pushed by the big companies who stand to profit from the use of their equipment and tech.

http://www.ge.com/products_services/directory/by_product.html . Look up the background of almost all the scientists that advocate Global warming as we are being told and you will find it is being pushed and funded by big business. all you gotts do is look

Answer 1

It is just the skeptics way of saying" talk to the hand"

It is just a lazy catch phrase.

Answer 2

Nobody can deny that global warming is happening.  There are numerous indicators.

However, the real question is - WHAT is causing global warming?  Occam's Razor can (and should!) be applied to all the possible causes.

Anybody who says that using Occam's razor is  a lazy way of reasoning, simply  does not understand the premise ;)

Answer 3

Well, "the simplest is the best" paraphrasing of Occam's Razor really isn't that accurate, in my opinion. The axiom, as interperted by Bertrand Russel, states that if one can explain a phenomenon without assuming hypotheticals, then there is no ground for assuming them. In other words, for two or more explanations considered on equal ground in terms of their ability to explain the observed responses, one should always opt first for the explanation in terms of the fewest possible number of causes, factors, or variables. When/if those explanations are eliminated, then go and consider the rest.

If you do want to go with the "simplest answer is the best" type of interpretation, I would rather see it phrased "the simplest answer is, all else being equal, the most likely". I'd use "likely" instead of "best". This captures the basic sentiment and suggests that the explanation is tentative and needs to be confirmed. When you say "the best", it suggests that the explanation is absolute and no further consideration is due. You don't want to give that impression, it's not very scientific :)

So, in terms of global warming, one needn't go any farther than naming extra CO2 emissions as the primary explanation, which is fairly simple put that way. However, in global warming as in any other theory in science, the more you study it, the more complexity you reveal. This doesn't mean Occam's razor stops applying, because Occam's razor is meant to slice away the hypotheticals, not the actual evidence and theory based on that evidence.

Answer 4

Very interesting i have been thinking the same thing, but consider this i forgot who Emerson or Thoreau stated that if nature had existed for the purpose to help mankind, then it would not have been needed to subdued,

Nature indeed acts as its own force, but for thousands of years it has been bent by humanity that perhaps it going to break, so global warming? you can consider literal views or a phenomenon.

Answer 5

Let's look at a few ideas " Occam's Razor" would not have worked with. By all appearances, the sun revolves around the earth. Since my marble isn't rolling, the earth must be flat. These idea's have been proven wrong. The theory's we have now are more complicated than the simplest explanation. Here are a couple of established beliefs or theories if you will that may be wrong, and " Occam's Razor" may be a good theory. Oil is a fossil fuel, like water deep oil reserves are not more voluminous than shallow reserves. Since you went off track I couldn't resist. A professor at U.C.L.A. once suggested that their haven't been enough dinosaurs to create as much oil as we have on this planet. In fact their hasn't been enough foliage to feed as many dinosaurs as it would take for same. The Germans after WW ll began working on a theory. They believed it was possible oil wasn't left by our fossil fuel friends at all. They thought maybe, like water, the earth contained deep reservoirs. they began drilling where two major rivers forked because they believed their to be a crevice or crack at that point. Their experiment was successful. Oil companies have been planning deep water drilling in the Sea of Cortez for the same reason. Imagine how ignorant we would be if we didn't go any further than "Occam's Razor". Just as a test "Occam's Razor" is the poorest  way to equate man made greenhouse gases with global warming.

Answer 6

First, quoting from your link: "in other words, when multiple competing theories are equal in other respects, the principle recommends selecting the theory that introduces the fewest assumptions and postulates the fewest entities. It is in this sense that Occam's razor is usually understood."

Second, let me correct the mistake that is most commonly made by elementary school children and Yahoo Answer Skeptics. The theory suggest selecting the simplest theory first it does not suggest selecting the simplest theory and saying that it is the answer because it is the simplest.

In other words the simplest theory is selected for testing first. When the theory is tested (something skeptics don't do as that one has to actually engage in science to get this far) it either provides supporting evidence or fails to provide supporting evidence for the hypothesis (based on theory).

So, again it suggest selecting the simplest explanation first for testing (just like paranormal investigators and parapsychologist rule out all normal/natural explanations first) NOT that the simplest explanation IS the answer.

Thus, when a skeptic suggest Occam's razor perhaps people should ask what the results of experimental testing of their theory have shown.

More directed to your question: Global Warming is just one of many things where the simplest answer was not the correct one. The we can shoot a man to the moon from a Cannon idea didn't work out either.

Answer 7

Occam's razor is vastly overrated. it does NOT show that global warming doesn't exist, doesn't show that UFOs or ESP don't exist, doesn't show that there was no conspiracy to kill JFK. The "all things being equal" part mostly negates the "simplest theory" part of the assertion.  Given that all things are almost never equal.

Answer 8

Occam's razor only applies to cases in which there is equivalent evidence.  With global warming, there is a vast amount of evidence that it is serious, and at least partly man-made.

To illustrate, take two theories concerning the colour of rubies: (1) they're all red, and (2) they're all red now, but in October 2011 they all turn yellow with green spots.  Well, we look at all rubies, and they're all red, so this conforms with both theories.  But (1) is simpler than (2), so we go with (1) as the more likely option.

.

Answer 9

i think you misunderstood Occam's Razor... especially the part "All things being equal"

sometimes things aren't equal... you know, like when there is DATA supporting a different (though perhaps more complex) explanation.

Let's use Occam's Razor to explain the Mystery of the Demise of the Dinosaurs.  Okay, on the one hand we have this Rube Goldberg explanation with asteroids hitting the Earth and Nuclear Winter... on the other hand, maybe male dinosaurs just didnt find female dinosaurs attractive anymore...

Which explanation would Occam's Razor lead you to prefer?

Answer 10

The "razor" argument is old and doesn't hold up in most science today.  Newton disproved that with his work in celestial mechanics. Coming up with new type of math is hardly the simplest answer.  It works well in simple systems and breaks down in others.  The old saying that, when you hear hoof beats it's probably horses not zebras, works fine here but what if you live in Africa.  You have to apply the right science to the question.  Right now they can't even get the weather right for 2 days in a row.  But predictions about global warming made in the 60's are coming true now, and sooner then they had predicted.  I don't think the future is going to be that good, no one seems to want to put any conservation plan in affect now.  If the global warming side is right ,then we may have already screwed ourselves on this one.  Seeing how the whole survival of humans may be in the balance do you really want to play Russian roulette with 3 bullets in the gun?  Remember 998 out of 1000 scientists  believe global warming is real, the other 2 work for Exxon, who are you going to believe?

Answer 11

I had never heard of Occams Razor until a few weeks ago! You learn something new all the time....  Well, the "Razor" theory leaves me a bit cold and certainly doesn't apply to complex situations like Global Warming, or indeed the Paranormal.  I think it's just an easy way to explain something without having to use your head!

Answer 12

Occams Razor, means in nature the simple explanation is correct more often then a complicated one.It's not meant to be universally correct..If something ghostly happens while in bed.I think most of us would agree,it's usually a dream.That's Occams Razor applied correctly.Believe it or not, some skeptics agree with you,kind of.Here's an article you might find interesting.