Once more, the whiskey has begun to flow. In this episode, Graham and Ray tackle the question of how many published studies are likely invalid or not reproducible. We learn about Type I and Type II statistical errors, publication bias, the Proteus Phenomenon and the Winner’s Curse.  As well, the wrath of Almighty Zod rains down in the form of thunder, eliciting a visit from Graham’s adorable dog Ouie. And we learn that Ray’s Wikipedia page has been taken down. (Hey, he never created it in the first place, so nothing lost, right?)

Links from today’s show:

Graham & Ray answer listener questions (yes, we have listeners now), including one from a dog who is very concerned about how dependent human civilization is on the existence of the sun. (Dogs are deep, man). We also answer that critical question currently plaguing the Internet: is 2016 a cursed year for celebrity mortality?

Links from today’s show

Graham and Ray are once more deep into the grown-up juice (i.e., whiskey), so much so that they confuse Willy Nelson with John Denver, Bob Denver, Bob Dylan, Israel Kamakawiwo’ole, and Cat Stevens. But they do eventually answer a question from a Twitter follower who asks, “Do we have too many friends?” This leads to discussion of Satoshi Kanazawa’s “Savannah Principle“, the ideas behind “knowledge mobilization“, and even an introduction to the science of bibliometrics.

Links from today’s show:

Graham and Ray are deep into the whiskey, and are mumbling their way through this episode, which is ostensibly about whether an artificial computer intelligence can be …wait for it… artistic. Be forewarned: there was a weird hum when we did the recording, but it was removed in post-production. As a result, the audio quality might be a bit less than optimal. In this episode, we return to our regular “Facts & The Furious” and “The Celestial Emporium of Benevolent Knowledge” segments. Also, Graham spoils the ending to the movie, Her, because that’s what he does; and Ray plugs the great science-fiction novel, Spin.

Links from today’s show:

Responding to a question on our Facebook page, in this episode Graham and Ray talk about whether the flu vaccine is safe, why the formulation changes every year, what disease surveillance systems are, and introduce the epidemiological concepts, “bias” and “confounding.”

We mention that many modern vaccines don’t have the actual infective organism, but instead are made up of subunits of the organism which act as antigens. Here is a summary of which vaccines are typically made of actual organisms and which are made from inactive subunits:

Important links:

How do “they” know what your “recommended daily allowance” is? Are diets truly evidence based? What’s the difference between a wet lab and a dry lab? In this episode, Graham and Ray reply to an actual listener question, as Rashi on Facebook wants to know how to navigate the confusing world of recommended diets. Yes, we talk about nutrition while eating pie and drinking whiskey. We also rename our “Didja Know That” segment to “The Facts and The Furious” because, you know, we’re clever and stuff. And our “Is This Still A Thing” segment is renamed “The Celestial Emporium of Benevolent Knowledge”, in honour of Jorge Luis Borges.

Graham’s impression of a howler monkey was wayyyy off. Here‘s how one actually sounds.

Important links:

How would space aliens behave toward us? Can we even conceptualize something that is truly alien? In today’s show, Graham and Ray discuss the various ways in which human beings might interact with our galactic brethren. Carl Sagan and Charles Pellegrino are name-checked, as is comedian Jerrod Carmichael.

In our Is This Still A Thing segment, Graham quotes the Daoist text Wen Shi Zhen Jing. And we find out what the strongest organism on Earth is!

Java, cup o’ Joe, brown sludge, learning juice, jet fuel, or even a euphemism for sex –today’s episode is all about everyone’s favourite (legal) drug: coffee! What does this have to do with gerbils? Well…. you’ll see.

In today’s Rigorous of Ridiculous segment, Graham and Ray discuss “Coffee and Cancer of the Pancreas” and another retracted paper, “A computer application in mathematics.” We also continue our favourite segment, Didja Know, in which one monkey must determine which science “fact” is not particularly facty.

Graham and Ray discuss “moonshots”, those huge, government-led science initiatives that promise to change the world forever. Curing cancer? Living forever? Hover boards? Where should we focus our energies? We also introduce our new segment, Is This Still A Thing, in which we look at some examples of ancient civilizations dealing with scientific issues that continue to be relevant today. In this episode, Graham quotes from ancient historical and philosophical sources cited in The Shorter Science and Civilisation in China by Joseph Needham.

In our Rigorous or Ridiculous segment, we discuss the following two papers: “Celestial determinants of success in research“, a paper that explores whether your horoscope can predict if you will win a Nobel Prize, and “Biomechanical Characteristics of Hand
Coordination in Grasping Activities of Daily Living“, a controversial (retracted) paper that seems to posit the existence of God…or does it?

TERMS used: confirmation bias, clinical vs. statistical significance, gui 鬼 (ghost). For the full list, check out the glossary.

(The image above was taken from here.)

Welcome to Science Monkey! In today’s episode, Graham and Ray talk about pseudoscience and why we are still engaged with it, even in the modern, technological era. We also shamelessly plug our books, Words Well Put and Nothing To Do With Skin. And Graham recommends his translation of Six Records of a Life Adrift, by Shen Fu.

Some of the things we mention include: a University course that has some anti-vaccination elements, a questionable diet described in the New York Times that purports to miraculously “cure” autism, why people tend to fall for pseudoscience, and a 1997 Wall Street Journal advertisement, masquerading as a peer-reviewed science paper, called “Science Has Spoken: Global Warming Is A Myth”.

We introduce our segment, Rigorous or Ridiculous, in which we discuss whether a study is good or… not. Today, the papers we tackle are “Association between breastfeeding and intelligence, educational attainment, and income at 30 years of age: a prospective birth cohort study from Brazil” and “An Open-Label Pilot Study of Homeopathic Treatment of Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder in Children and Youth.”

Oh, and Ray is deeply embarrassed that he temporarily forgets what an “open label” study is.  Deeply, shamefully, devastatingly embarrassed. (But Graham guessed correctly.)

TERMS used in today’s podcast: prospective, longitudinal, association, correlation, continuous variable, dichotomous variable, open label, control group, pilot study. (See the glossary for the full list.)