Nathan Moynihan

Theoretical physicist thinking about scattering amplitudes and gravity.

[Nathan Moynihan @ntmoynihan]

@OneTrueSpartan @paulmasonnews Maybe because he's a habitual liar? I still remember his 10 pledges, all of which he's abandoned after being given the vote.

[Owen Jones @owenjonesjourno]

A warning here.

The Greens nearly won - but Labour split the vote, handing Reform the seat.

[💙 Sophie Socket ♠️ @Socket1Sophie]

If you’re a voter in Gorton & Denton and you believe that you’re better off with a parachuted-in Farage GB News presenter who has joked about hating Manchester instead of a local Cllr who juggles political duties with being a plumber, you need your fucking head examining.

[Nathan Moynihan @ntmoynihan]

@LumoTravel I'm stuck on this train at York, why is it stopping at Newcastle? By the time we arrive there may not be any other trains to Edinburgh! What are we supposed to do then?

[Nathan Moynihan @ntmoynihan]

@zarahsultana This is very disappointing @zarahsultana. Makes it look like you're trying to scupper the party before it starts! Get your act together, and you @jeremycorbyn

[Nathan Moynihan @ntmoynihan]

@howallworks @matterasmachine @skdh @howallworks I've tried reading your PDF at some point. Can you summarise your findings in an abstract, few hundred words?

[Nathan Moynihan @ntmoynihan]

@MetaSimulation @skdh do you actually agree with this statement?

[Nathan Moynihan @ntmoynihan]

@higgsfield_ai I'll bite, please DM

[Nathan Moynihan @ntmoynihan]

@bitcloud In science, nothing can be proved true (but can be proved false), so instead we should apply a credence to their likelihood. That's obviously not the same as faith, since our credence is based on the available evidence and updated when the evidence changes.

[Nathan Moynihan @ntmoynihan]

@stellacreasy @owenjonesjourno Eternal shame on you @stellacreasy. 👎

[Nathan Moynihan @ntmoynihan]

@GregTrayling One of the best books on spinors IMO. Much easier to get into than Penrose and Rindler volume 1

[Nathan Moynihan @ntmoynihan]

@TOEwithCurt This is a nice writeup! I agree with the majority of it, but I think there are some good (philosophical) reasons to throw those solutions out....But you are entirely correct that GR itself doesn't do that.

[Nathan Moynihan @ntmoynihan]

@welt_woman This is so fucked up 🥲

[Nathan Moynihan @ntmoynihan]

The case for proportional representation grows ever stronger...

[YouGov @YouGov]

Latest YouGov Westminster voting intention (13-14 July 2025)

Ref: 28% (+2 from 6-7 June)
Lab: 22% (-2)
Con: 17% (+1)
Lib Dem: 16% (+1)
Green: 12% (+1)
SNP: 3% (=)

[Nathan Moynihan @ntmoynihan]

@JennyLeee007 @jakescottMD What does that matter now? It's at the very least deeply misleading.

[Nathan Moynihan @ntmoynihan]

@martinmbauer This reads very differently if you're a fan of Sophus Lie .

[Elshad 🇬🇧🇪🇺 @ElshadKarbasi]

Cameron’s idea of holding a referendum to finish off Farage has turned out to be a stroke of pure genius

Truly one of the greatest political operators of our time

[Sulkhan Metreveli @Sulkhan]

Ok so, one of the guys who wrote “correlation is not causation” in response to this chart is me. So, I take it personally. I repeat, this chart is bullshit and I call the author out as a pseudo scientist. I regret I have to waste my time on this. If the author has had visited any of the data science classes and knew how to use Google Scholar, I didn't have had to.

Now, this post is long. If you want to know the truth, read it:

this chart is a textbook example of correlation without causation, and it’s deeply misleading in its implications. Here’s what you’re looking at — and why it’s problematic:

What the chart claims:

It plots:
•Blue/purple line: Cumulative number of vaccine doses recommended over time (Y-axis left).
•Red line: Prevalence of autism diagnoses over the same period (Y-axis right).
•The graph emphasizes a strong correlation (R = 0.9021) between the two.

The implied message is that more vaccines have caused more autism cases.

Why this is scientifically and statistically invalid:

1. Correlation does not imply causation

Just because two trends rise together doesn’t mean one causes the other. For example, both:
•Autism diagnoses
•Organic food sales

…have risen over the decades. That doesn’t mean organic food causes autism.

2. Autism diagnoses increased due to broader diagnostic criteria
•In the 1980s and 1990s, autism spectrum disorders began to include milder forms like Asperger’s.
•Awareness, public education, and better screening also contributed.
•It’s not that there were fewer cases before — they simply weren’t diagnosed.

3. Vaccines have been studied thoroughly

Numerous large-scale epidemiological studies (meta-analyses, cohort studies, case-control studies) have repeatedly found no causal link between vaccines and autism.
•Most famously, the 2004 Institute of Medicine (IOM) report and countless CDC and WHO reviews.
•The original 1998 Wakefield study suggesting a link between MMR and autism was fraudulent, retracted, and led to the loss of the author’s medical license.

4. The Y-axes are cherry-picked
•The vaccine dose axis assumes linear accumulation, ignoring changes in vaccine schedules and combinations.
•The autism axis uses inverse prevalence figures (e.g., 1 in 125), which can feel more dramatic visually.
•Matching unrelated Y-axes this way visually forces correlation, a classic manipulation technique.

5. Lack of control variables
•Where’s lead exposure, air pollution, parental age, diagnostic access, school screening mandates, etc.?
•None of the actual confounding variables are addressed — just a seductive visual pattern.

Bottom line:

This chart is scientifically illiterate propaganda. It preys on people’s concerns using a fallacious method to provoke fear.

If this were shown in a serious academic setting, it would be discredited immediately as:
•Cherry-picking
•Data misrepresentation
•Violating the most basic rules of causal inference

I invite the author to visit my data sciene class. That will help a lot…

[Nathan Moynihan @ntmoynihan]

@CilComLFC Why is every normal government suddenly far left? What qualifies as far left these days, free healthcare?