Instruct: Classify Amazon reviews into positive or negative sentiment
Query: A Classic Example of the Danger of Post-hoc Explanations

An interesting sci-fi book, but for anyone who finds Hoagland's post-hoc explanations persuasive, I strongly recommend R. Gary Patterson's "The Walrus Was Paul : The Great Beatle Death Clues". Each provides a great example of how very compelling arguments and patterns can be found in random data, when one looks hard enough. As the quote from Sagan on the back cover of Hoagland's book stated, the Face on Mars was within the realm of science. However, since the re-imaging failed to confirm a face, Hoagland now insists the images were doctored. Since there is no evidence that could potentially disconfirm his theories that he could not explain away in this manner, he has moved the face issue out of the realm of science into an issue of faith. Psychoanalytic theory suffered a similar fate. It does not mean that he is wrong, but it does mean his assertions can no longer be categorized under the rubric of the scientific method.