Reddit mentions of Willful Blindness: Why We Ignore the Obvious at Our Peril

> Someone rather more intelligent than I - from memory Richard Feynman - wrote a long and interesting article about scientific rigour, and how when you do one expirement that appears to suggest a theory, you don't assume the theory is right because it fitted that one set of data. Instead, you specifically design other experiments that TEST the theory.
The problem with this book is that there appears to have been a single "real world example" which suggested the theory, but that every other example is a "class room experiment by Professor X in which a series of students did Y..."

It's pretty unsettling to read that review because it really puts into question just how much scientifically rigorous the author was.

I'd like to also suggest this book:

http://www.amazon.ca/Willful-Blindness-Ignore-Obvious-Peril/dp/038566902X

edit: downvotes aren't helpful but some legitimate scientific studies will do, so far haven't seen anything convincing. I know it's uncomfortable to question your own beliefs because it gets to your egos but neither did people running LTCM. I just want one good convincing scientifically rigorous study that can back up the claim "Crowd is statistically significantly better at predicting the future than few experts and roll of a dice". If this was true, lot of hedge fund managers shouldn't even be trusted with billions of dollars under management. They should just blindly follow whatever ticker the crowd votes to purchase.