There are no facts in science - only measurement embedded within assumptions.
There are properties that have been determined so many times by different researchers and different techniques that we can treat a narrow range of values by consensus as if they were absolute facts. An example would be considering the boiling point of methanol at 1 atm to be 65C within one degree of accuracy. For most purposes that will suffice, as long as we understand the source of our confidence.
The problem arises when we treat rarely measured properties as facts simply because they are printed in peer-reviewed articles or tables in books. We teach our students not to trust numbers in Wikipedia but have no problem if they can cite a reference in a peer-reviewed journal, even without thoroughly analyzing the experimental sections.
We delude ourselves into thinking that we can appreciate our uncertainty of the value of a property simply by taking multiple measurements, taking an average and reporting standard deviation. That is actually a useful thing to do if we remember that we are measuring random errors and completely ignoring systematic errors, which are possibly very common in infrequently measured properties.
I like this one, even though he knows it is not FACT he threw that word out there as if it were, that is a tactic used by an experienced troll
Maybe this will help you understand.
Quoted Text
"Evolution is a Fact and a Theory"
Well evolution is a theory. It is also a fact. And facts and theories are different things, not rungs in a hierarchy of increasing certainty. Facts are the world's data. Theories are structures of ideas that explain and interpret facts.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
Trust me box I read tons of stuff on the subject your copy and paste will be no different, I'm as open minded as anyone else but there is nothing that convinces me YET that the Darwin theory is correct, maybe something may come along in the future but at the moment I'm not sold.
"In the beginning of a change, the Patriot is a scarce man, brave, hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, however, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a Patriot."
Box, do you believe the scientific method is the only way to truth? Can the scientific method ever be replaced by another method? Or has humanity's search for truth and evolution of thinking stopped at the scientific method FOREVER?
Trust me box I read tons of stuff on the subject your copy and paste will be no different, I'm as open minded as anyone else but there is nothing that convinces me YET that the Darwin theory is correct, maybe something may come along in the future but at the moment I'm not sold.
If I have an eye problem, I go to an Eye expert... an eye doctor. If I have a plumbing problem, I consult a professional plumber. If I have a car problem, I consult an auto mechanic.
I could ask the auto mechanic about the eye problem, or ask the eye doctor about the plumbing problem or I could ask the eye doctor about both the plumbing and the auto problem... BUT the most likely avenue for success would be to ask the expert in the field. Almost ALL the Experts In The Field on the topic of Evolution, agree. There is almost no debate. No difference of opinion with a third choosing evolution, a third opting for creationism and a third undecided.
The Experts In The Field AGREE... They don't agree with Creationism.
So when you need an eye doctor or a plumber or a auto mechanic... be sure to consult your priest!
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
Box, do you believe the scientific method is the only way to truth? Can the scientific method ever be replaced by another method? Or has humanity's search for truth and evolution of thinking stopped at the scientific method FOREVER?
Cicero's Scientific Method:
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
The Experts In The Field AGREE... They don't agree with Creationism.
P
You mean the experts in that THEORY agree, that's fine with me but they must also convince me which they have yet to do, they can show me a fossil but they can't prove it is that of evolution, they can only prove it was extinct, that's not saying much when we know how many species went extinct over the years.
"In the beginning of a change, the Patriot is a scarce man, brave, hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, however, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a Patriot."
As far as Religion ( which creationism is an undeniable part of) , I am curious of where you stand... Point blank question: Are you an Atheist or Agnostic? Just a simple yes or no will do... For me at least, it will go a long way in answering the question..
"Arguing with liberals is like playing chess with a pigeon; no matter how good I am at chess, the pigeon is just going to knock out the pieces, crap on the board, and strut around like it is victorious." - Author Unknown
Box, do you believe the scientific method is the only way to truth? Can the scientific method ever be replaced by another method? Or has humanity's search for truth and evolution of thinking stopped at the scientific method FOREVER?
I see the problem that those who believe in evolution will accept no other possibilities, if someone searches another theory even if using science they're shut down and mocked. To some it is accept my theory and do not look any farther, if you want to look farther you must start at where my theory begins.
"In the beginning of a change, the Patriot is a scarce man, brave, hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, however, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a Patriot."
Box can't be an agnostic. That would mean there may be a realm that cannot be measured with the scientific method. And the scientific method is the only method that can be considered, and all people must use it. It is law.
I see the problem that those who believe in evolution will accept no other possibilities, if someone searches another theory even if using science they're shut down and mocked. To some it is accept my theory and do not look any farther, if you want to look farther you must start at where my theory begins.
Yes, thinking must conform to one single method. Whether we are talking democrat vs republican, democracy, or any of the dogmatic beliefs that this is the one and only way. It puts people into a box(no pun intended). It makes the masses easy to control and predict.
Look what Chris Christie said - 'the strain of libertarianism going through both parties is DANGEROUS'. And watch box and others go ape sh!t when people form their world view through a libertarian spectrum. It upsets their paradigm that limits how you can think. If you think otherwise, you are a threat to their reality.
Yes, thinking must conform to one single method. Whether we are talking democrat vs republican, democracy, or any of the dogmatic beliefs that this is the one and only way. It puts people into a box(no pun intended). It makes the masses easy to control and predict.
Exactly... good pun by the way
"In the beginning of a change, the Patriot is a scarce man, brave, hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, however, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a Patriot."
Speaking to people 40 and younger. I get the feeling there is a growing number that do not want to be stuffed in the box any longer. They are looking for a new way.
Logged
