Follow The Logic of Science on Facebook.
- Follow The Logic of Science on WordPress.com
-
Join 181.3K other subscribers
Archives
- April 2026 (1)
- February 2026 (1)
- January 2026 (1)
- December 2025 (3)
- March 2025 (1)
- February 2025 (1)
- May 2024 (1)
- April 2024 (1)
- January 2024 (1)
- September 2022 (1)
- July 2022 (1)
- January 2022 (2)
- August 2021 (1)
- July 2021 (1)
- June 2021 (2)
- March 2021 (1)
- October 2020 (1)
- September 2020 (2)
- August 2020 (1)
- June 2020 (2)
- May 2020 (1)
- April 2020 (1)
- February 2020 (1)
- January 2020 (1)
- November 2019 (2)
- September 2019 (2)
- August 2019 (2)
- July 2019 (2)
- May 2019 (1)
- March 2019 (3)
- February 2019 (2)
- January 2019 (2)
- December 2018 (1)
- October 2018 (1)
- September 2018 (1)
- August 2018 (3)
- July 2018 (3)
- June 2018 (2)
- March 2018 (3)
- February 2018 (1)
- January 2018 (1)
- December 2017 (2)
- November 2017 (1)
- October 2017 (3)
- September 2017 (1)
- August 2017 (2)
- July 2017 (1)
- June 2017 (3)
- May 2017 (2)
- April 2017 (3)
- March 2017 (3)
- February 2017 (3)
- January 2017 (4)
- December 2016 (2)
- November 2016 (2)
- October 2016 (5)
- September 2016 (2)
- August 2016 (5)
- July 2016 (4)
- June 2016 (5)
- May 2016 (2)
- April 2016 (3)
- March 2016 (6)
- February 2016 (4)
- January 2016 (4)
- December 2015 (4)
- November 2015 (5)
- October 2015 (4)
- September 2015 (4)
- August 2015 (5)
- July 2015 (4)
- June 2015 (2)
- May 2015 (3)
- April 2015 (6)
- March 2015 (8)
- February 2015 (10)
- January 2015 (17)
Tag Archives: evaluating evidence
COVID comorbidities are not analogous to car crashes: Debunking the 6% mortality claim
Recently, the CDC released data on COVID comorbidities, including data showing that 6% of COVID-19 deaths only listed COVID on the death certificate, while the remaining 94% of COVID deaths also listed other conditions. Many have jumped on this as … Continue reading
Posted in Uncategorized
Tagged Bad arguments, evaluating evidence
Comments Off on COVID comorbidities are not analogous to car crashes: Debunking the 6% mortality claim
What does “statistically significant” mean?
Lately, social media has been flooded with people sharing studies about various aspects of COVID. This is potentially great. I’m all for people being more engaged with science. Unfortunately, many people lack a good foundation for understanding science, and a … Continue reading
Posted in Nature of Science
Tagged evaluating evidence, peer-reviewed studies, statistics
10 Comments
Science is a path to knowledge
There are a lot of misconceptions about what science actually is, and, as a result, there are a lot of incorrect conclusions about the reliability and utility of science. I frequently encounter people who expect science to give absolute answers. … Continue reading
The problem with “just asking questions”
Asking questions is generally a good thing. Indeed, questions are the very foundation of science. People become scientists because they are curious and like to ask questions, and science itself is simply a systematic method for asking and answering questions. … Continue reading
More anti-vaccine cherry-picking: A rebuttal to, “Should you be afraid that measles can give you immune amnesia?”
Earlier this week, I wrote a post about measles-induced “immune amnesia” and the growing body of evidence supporting it. Afterwards, I was directed to an anti-vaccine “rebuttal” to this evidence (not to my post specifically) which has been making its … Continue reading
The Logic of Science 