My Scientific Eponym: Somma’s Stochastic

I’ve been trying to figure out how to immortalize myself with my very own Scientific Eponym, and…

Eureka! Behold!

Somma’s Stochastic

Somma’s Stochastic states that the number and intensity of logical fallacies employed by a pundit in a debate is inversely proportional to the empirical evidence supporting their position.

Stated Simply The less science behind a pundit’s belief, the more BS they shovel to distort the issue.

To the left of the equation, we have good science with the -1 indicating it’s inverse relationship to the logical fallacies being put out to the right wing hand of the equation.

For example:

	Intelligent Design
	“The fact that Microbiology and Organic Chemistry are too difficult for me to understand, means that all life must have actually been designed by an invisible old man in the sky who cannot be detected, quantified, logically inferred, or otherwise shown to exist.” (Argument from Ignorance, Argumentum ad Ignorantiam)

Another example:

	Anthropogenic Global Warming Skepticism
	“So what if you have decades of data, ice core analyses, atmospheric measurements, and broad scientific consensus? It snowed in North Dakota today! Don’t you look silly!!!” (anecdotal fallacy)

Check out more Scientific Eponyms hosted at the Science Creative Quarterly.