I thought Blair was very precise with his language over Iraq. He told
us precisely the right amount of oleaginous half-truths to get
Parliament to approve of his war-mongering, with sufficient uncertainty
that went it all went pear-shaped he would be able to argue that he
should not be sent to the War Crimes tribunal in the Hague.
TIM
-----Original Message-----
From: Clinical biochemistry discussion list
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Roger Ekins
Sent: 22 January 2010 10:49 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Iraq - a need for "precision"
Is it not a case of scientists perverting the meaning of common English
words?
The OED defines precision as: "The fact, condition, or quality of being
precise; exactness, definiteness; distinctness, accuracy"
citing as an example L. Murray Eng. Gram. (ed. 5) I. 438 (1824):
Precision is the third requisite of perspicuity with respect to words
and phrases. It signifies retrenching superfluities, and pruning the
expression, so as to exhibit neither more nor less, than an exact copy
of the person<cq>s idea who uses it.
And what about clinical chemists' definition (in the past) of
'accuracy'essentially as 'absence of bias', disregarding what
scientists now term 'imprecision'? (Nb. I'm delighted IUPAC has
rectified this omission, and now equates ' accuracy' with 'absence of
error', irrespective of whether the error is random or systematic.)
And what about 'sensitivity', concerning which ACB members are so
reluctant to express an opinion...?
Roger Ekins
>Though I may have misheard, I understand from tonight's news that Jack
>Straw claimed a need for "greater precision" with regard to the claim
>that Iraq could launch WMD within a 45 minute timeframe
>
>With apologies to our metrology colleagues, I wondered what he really
>wanted:
>
> - greater precision, eg 45 +/- 0.1 min
>
> - greater trueness, eg 44 min or 46 min
>
> - greater accuracy, eg 44 - 46 min
>
> - a stated uncertainty, eg 45 +/- 45 min
>
>More seriously, however, why do we permit non-scientists to abuse (or
>even pervert) scientific terminology - especially if it can then
>confuse the population?
>
>David
>
>------ACB discussion List Information-------- This is an open
>discussion list for the academic and clinical community working in
>clinical biochemistry.
>Please note, archived messages are public and can be viewed via the
>internet. Views expressed are those of the individual and they are
>responsible for all message content.
>ACB Web Site
>http://www.acb.org.uk
>Green Laboratories Work
>http://www.laboratorymedicine.nhs.uk
>List Archives
>http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/ACB-CLIN-CHEM-GEN.html
>List Instructions (How to leave etc.)
>http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/
--
Prof Roger Ekins, PhD DSc FRS
Windeyer Institute
University College London
London W1T 4JF
Phone +44 20 7679 9410
Fax +44 20 7679 9407
------ACB discussion List Information-------- This is an open discussion
list for the academic and clinical community working in clinical
biochemistry.
Please note, archived messages are public and can be viewed via the
internet. Views expressed are those of the individual and they are
responsible for all message content.
ACB Web Site
http://www.acb.org.uk
Green Laboratories Work
http://www.laboratorymedicine.nhs.uk
List Archives
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/ACB-CLIN-CHEM-GEN.html
List Instructions (How to leave etc.)
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/
------ACB discussion List Information--------
This is an open discussion list for the academic and clinical community working in clinical biochemistry.
Please note, archived messages are public and can be viewed via the internet. Views expressed are those of the individual and they are responsible for all message content.
ACB Web Site
http://www.acb.org.uk
Green Laboratories Work
http://www.laboratorymedicine.nhs.uk
List Archives
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/ACB-CLIN-CHEM-GEN.html
List Instructions (How to leave etc.)
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/
|