@sonhouse saidWould you stop bringing up Trump in every post that has absolutely nothing to do with Trump?
And you trust the worlds richest man to be the one who holds the keys to our entire economy?
Are you so trusting you think Musk has no agenda going on that would be against the values of the US?
Shutting down USAID? which is our goodwill bill helping starving children all over the world and now like I mean NOW, there is no money for any of those things.
This is fine wit ...[text shortened]... thing but with an agenda of wanting to take over the counties they donate to.
Is THAT ok with you?
@Ponderable saidSorry. I am just one of millions who are reacting to Trump coup #2, successful it seems, totally taking over the entire government. We will fight him,
I declare that thread to be completely derailed...
So no more on that front.
@Ponderable saidThe best way to describe science is as a method to answer questions based on objective data.
Well lets try to put up a serisous discussion here:
Some theses:
* Science is fact-driven, meaning, that observations need to be accurately documented and repeated.
* Science is nearing truth mainly by excluding theses which have been proven wrong.
* A good scientific experiment is set up in a way to dsiprove a (reasonable) hypothesis.
As such, it can't really define facts, only test questions. Every added experiment that supports a "fact" will only improve the likelihood it is true. Every observation remains disputable.
@wildgrass
In fact the keepers of the European "normals" meet regularly to compare them.
And I know of people who regularly thest the "hypothesis" of gravitation.
@Ponderable saidThis is what people mean by "trust scientists" and "trust experts". They know better than to say they have the right answers, but they are the best at guessing what is most likely correct at any given time.
@wildgrass
In fact the keepers of the European "normals" meet regularly to compare them.
And I know of people who regularly thest the "hypothesis" of gravitation.
@wildgrass saidIndeed people claiming to know the "truth" are often overestimating their abilities.
This is what people mean by "trust scientists" and "trust experts". They know better than to say they have the right answers, but they are the best at guessing what is most likely correct at any given time.
So scientists built models to understand a very complex world and then try to find an experiment which would prove one (or more) hypotheses on which the model stands to be false. If the experiment finds no (significant) difference to the perdictions of the mdoel, the model is stronger. And some models are unchallnged for decades and technology is built on the assumption that tehy are correct.
So I would trust an airplane being built on the principles of aerodynamics more than one dreamed up by some layperson.
@Ponderable saidWell, any science except the search for life origins. THERE, science is ALWAYS wrong.
Indeed people claiming to know the "truth" are often overestimating their abilities.
So scientists built models to understand a very complex world and then try to find an experiment which would prove one (or more) hypotheses on which the model stands to be false. If the experiment finds no (significant) difference to the perdictions of the mdoel, the model is stronger. ...[text shortened]... n airplane being built on the principles of aerodynamics more than one dreamed up by some layperson.
You claim you would accept proof if it showed up that life came from mud or whatever but I think you would just move the goalpost and change the definition of life or some other tactic to preserve your own version of life origin.
@sonhouse saidI am not sure that I understand where I posted to that effect.
Well, any science except the search for life origins. THERE, science is ALWAYS wrong.
You claim you would accept proof if it showed up that life came from mud or whatever but I think you would just move the goalpost and change the definition of life or some other tactic to preserve your own version of life origin.
I was not talking about the origin of life.
@Ponderable saidSorry, was talking about Kelly. He will fight the idea that life could have come from mud to his dying day.
I am not sure that I understand where I posted to that effect.
I was not talking about the origin of life.