Retrobike Forum Index

It is currently Fri Dec 09, 2016 6:45 pm

* Login   * Register * Search  * FAQ



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 25 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jan 28, 2013 7:13 pm 
Retro Guru
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 10, 2008 11:47 am
Posts: 466
Location: belgium
ajm wrote:
Bram J wrote:
Science can't be bent, it is also self-correcting. Plus in most cases scientists working in the industry have to come up with stuff that simply works, so it has to be correct. Scientists at universities will neither be likely to bend science. Only scientists who do research on request of politicians might apply to your idea. But they can't bend the facts either, facts are simply that.


Your faith in science is touching, but sadly misguided. Scientists working for universities (and everywhere else for that matter) are very likely to bend science; whether consciously or not, every scientist has their own opinions and worldview and that affects every single thing they do and see.

You say that facts are facts and can't be changed... however bare "facts" are actually not that easy to come by. The same evidence can be viewed by two scientists with completely incompatible theories as supporting or proving their own pet theory correct, and yet both may be completely wrong; it often happens that several stories (theories) can be made to fit the bare facts.

Scientists work under a system of organised peer pressure where in some fields, having a minority opinion or worldview is enough to ensure that they will never receive funding and will be effectively unemployable. Sadly if you read enough science history you will find that all-prevailing scientific theories held as indisputable fact have actually been completely wrong and it is only years, decades or even centuries later that the tide turns.


Ah, a very sensible post, thank you.
I don't see how my 'worldview' would influence my conclusions when trying to figure out if the males of a certain bird-species are heavier than the females of said species. :) :wink: Of course in other areas this might be the case. However, if errors are made they will be set straight eventually.
"The same evidence can often be interpreted in more than one way to fit different theories." That is absolutely correct, but there is no problem here. In this case neither theory has been proven and further research is needed. This is where the subtle difference between evidence and proof becomes visible.
"history..." Well I happen to be quite informed on science history and what you say is again true. Classic example was the way Darwin was ridiculed in his day. But he was right, and this is the cool part: it got proven. Darwin also held the minority opinion, which eventually became the majority opinion (in science) due to the accumulation of evidence and proof. I acknowledge that in some fields of research holding a minority opinion can indeed be tough, but when this minority is right, eventually it will become accepted. Plus there's a difference between opinion and proven point.
Thanks,
Bram


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jan 28, 2013 7:22 pm 
Retro Guru

Joined: Sat Dec 11, 2010 10:08 am
Posts: 847
Location: French Alps/Annecy
I honestly don't see how you can bend science, or to put put another way bend established scientific fact.

Water boils at sea level at 100°C

Objects on earth fall at 9.81ms/s

how can you actually bend these facts ?

I however that people can see what most fits their idzeas in certain kinds of data.

The use of the word faith is a bit bizarre, it kind of implies a belief in something.

Bram, have you read The Demon Haunted World by Carl Sagan ?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jan 28, 2013 9:24 pm 
Retro Guru

Joined: Wed Apr 04, 2007 2:33 pm
Posts: 723
Location: Highlands
B77 wrote:
I honestly don't see how you can bend science, or to put put another way bend established scientific fact.
Water boils at sea level at 100°C
Objects on earth fall at 9.81ms/s
how can you actually bend these facts ?


Well, you can't easily - these are the bare facts I was talking about. These are useful facts, the accuracy of which can be ascertained by repeated experimentation; this is the kind of science that (once engineers get involved) leads to useful improvements in technology.

Quote:
The use of the word faith is a bit bizarre, it kind of implies a belief in something.


Not at all; now we come to Bran's second reply; he believes that Charles Darwin's ideas have been _proved_ correct by due scientific process.

This is nothing like true - if anything, real science has uncovered unimaginable levels of complexity in the most basic building blocks of life which make the gaping holes Darwin himself saw in his theory look like microscopic pinpricks. And yet... lots of otherwise rational scientists believe in his basic theory - why? Because it's their worldview (religion.) They don't want to accept anything as existing that they cannot measure, and so they _believe_ that what exists must have come by plain statistical chance from what already existed (even if we know scientifically that there must actually have been a beginning to all material things.)

It doesn't matter that rational scientific and statistical analysis of the issue says that it is impossible on a range of different levels; they will insist that because life exists as we know it, the statistics are wrong! It's circular reasoning based on the worldview (=faith) through which they interpret everything they see and measure.

Their stories on how we came to be, and on how life around us will continue to develop are NOT facts at all; they're opinions, theories, philosophy.

EVERYBODY has a framework through which they interpret the actual facts which they find, whether they realise it or not. Real science is and will always be simply unable to answer a lot of the very big questions in life and scientists are at best fallible human beings with their own agendas and prejudices.

(I have worked in academia and had my own research published in the past, so I'm not just spouting 3rd hand "knowledge" here - I'm pleased to say it was real science which was and is open to proof or disproof through repeated experimentation ;-) )


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jan 28, 2013 11:06 pm 
Retro Guru
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 10, 2008 11:47 am
Posts: 466
Location: belgium
ajm wrote:
B77 wrote:
I honestly don't see how you can bend science, or to put put another way bend established scientific fact.
Water boils at sea level at 100°C
Objects on earth fall at 9.81ms/s
how can you actually bend these facts ?


Well, you can't easily - these are the bare facts I was talking about. These are useful facts, the accuracy of which can be ascertained by repeated experimentation; this is the kind of science that (once engineers get involved) leads to useful improvements in technology.

Quote:
The use of the word faith is a bit bizarre, it kind of implies a belief in something.


Not at all; now we come to Bran's second reply; he believes that Charles Darwin's ideas have been _proved_ correct by due scientific process.

This is nothing like true - if anything, real science has uncovered unimaginable levels of complexity in the most basic building blocks of life which make the gaping holes Darwin himself saw in his theory look like microscopic pinpricks. And yet... lots of otherwise rational scientists believe in his basic theory - why? Because it's their worldview (religion.) They don't want to accept anything as existing that they cannot measure, and so they _believe_ that what exists must have come by plain statistical chance from what already existed (even if we know scientifically that there must actually have been a beginning to all material things.)

It doesn't matter that rational scientific and statistical analysis of the issue says that it is impossible on a range of different levels; they will insist that because life exists as we know it, the statistics are wrong! It's circular reasoning based on the worldview (=faith) through which they interpret everything they see and measure.

Their stories on how we came to be, and on how life around us will continue to develop are NOT facts at all; they're opinions, theories, philosophy.

EVERYBODY has a framework through which they interpret the actual facts which they find, whether they realise it or not. Real science is and will always be simply unable to answer a lot of the very big questions in life and scientists are at best fallible human beings with their own agendas and prejudices.

(I have worked in academia and had my own research published in the past, so I'm not just spouting 3rd hand "knowledge" here - I'm pleased to say it was real science which was and is open to proof or disproof through repeated experimentation ;-) )


I can tell your research was not on the subject of biology though.
Evolution is one of those facts. Just like gravity. Seriously.
What was the research you had published, I'm interested. Genuinely.

"if anything, real science has uncovered unimaginable levels of complexity in the most basic building blocks of life which make the gaping holes Darwin himself saw in his theory look like microscopic pinpricks."
Show me. I don't take your word for it.

I liked your previous post a lot more. This one made me sad. :( :wink:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jan 28, 2013 11:08 pm 
Retro Guru
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 10, 2008 11:47 am
Posts: 466
Location: belgium
B77 wrote:
Bram, have you read The Demon Haunted World by Carl Sagan ?

No, I haven't. Carl Sagan rocks though. Will try to check it out if I find some spare time.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 25 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Exabot [Bot], godders, jm, Stick Legs and 23 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  

About Us

Follow Retrobike

Other cool stuff

All content © 2005-2015 Retrobike unless otherwise stated.
Cookies Policy.
bikedeals - the best bike deals in one place
FatCOGS - Fat Chance Owner's Group

Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group