Occam's Razor Apparently Doesn't Apply to Evolutionary Psychologists...

And apparently PhDs can't use Google...


Yes, I am in a wroth.

Not because of this stupid flap with "You Lie!" Wilson, but because someone is floating possibly the dumbest of dodges to try to deflect public attention.

Satoshi Kanazawa pulled a Beck, in Psychology Today of all places.

He asks how such an amazing picture could have been taken? How?  And then muses on how difficult it must have been to capture an image, so crisp, so clear, and so PERFECTLY CENTERED!

Apparently in Dr. Kanazawa's world, they have never, ever mentioned a skill set that my 8 year old has gotten the knack of with cropping photographs.

And apparently, as a PhD with books and having dealt with the publishing industry, has never actually worked with a professional DSLR camera, or a professional photographer. Apparently modern technology is new, and therefore he must fear it, because high speed, high resolution cameras are just TOO fanciful a thought, and immediately one must wonder WHO tipped the photographer off?

Who indeed?  Because Occam's Razor isn't for Evolutionary Psychologists, or for PhDs who sometimes moonlight as generators of consent. Which this entirely fabricated flap is supposed to do.  To raise the question, and turn our South Carolina Representative into the victim, as opposed to rude boor.

Mind you, Kanazawa has appeared  to ask questions before. Simple questions. You know, about Evolutionary Biology. And stuff. Particularly when the theories that he has written books on have been torn apart by statisticians who question his sampling and analysis.  Or when he's been caught out giving less than scientific opinion. I like this gem of his on The War on Terror:

"Imagine that, on September 11, 2001, when the Twin Towers came down, the President of the United States was not George W. Bush, but Ann Coulter. What would have happened then? On September 12, President Coulter would have ordered the US military forces to drop 35 nuclear bombs throughout the Middle East, killing all of our actual and potential enemy combatants, and their wives and children. On September 13, the war would have been over and won, without a single American life lost. Yes, we need a woman in the White House, but not the one who’s running..."

Bias, he has some. And some odd theories in a sometimes questionable field of study, Evolutionary Psychology.  His latest theory that "attractive people have more girl children" was reduced to garbage, when folks actually looked at his statistical models.

But it kills me that this hack is poking his nose, in Psychology Today of all places, to waft up conspiracy theories is just stunning to me.

Because Google is so damn hard to type searches into?  Especially for a PhD?  It's disingenuous crap like this that bugs me, because some people will actually wonder about the CONSPIRACY! because apparently Occam's Razor is now the size of a Bic Disposable...

Originally posted on Sat Sep 12, 2009 at 22:22:49 PM EDT at The Motley Moose