You may have noticed a series of articles recently on mass animal deaths. Google has now set up a website to track these incidents. This is an interesting example of how the Internet is changing how we collect and analyze data. The normal scientific method is to develop a hypothesis, determine what data would prove or disprove the hypothesis, collect the data, and conduct an analysis of the data. Here we have the reverse - we are aggregating data and then drawing conclusions as a community from apparent linkages.
The problem is that while many people will view the aggregate data (i.e. the final map), few will dig into the background information of each occurrence to determine if there is indeed a link. Consequently, the aggregate data can be used to support a wide range of hypotheses, including conspiracy theories and alien interventions.
It's a really variation on a question that's been around for a long time: are things occurring more frequently or are we just becoming more aware of them because of improved communications? Without detailed analysis, data collection of this type may be interesting or even intriguing but ultimately is nothing more than a curiosity.
Comments