Seems like it was all for naught, the same folks make a similar necklace with a little microscope charm.
It's not my gift to give, and I was out voted.
Seems like it was all for naught, the same folks make a similar necklace with a little microscope charm.
It's not my gift to give, and I was out voted.
bigdaddylee82 said:Well, uhh...
So it's dopamine. Thanks!
Yeah... I thought about that a little too late.
Sorry.
dculberson said:SVreX said:“The Earth is flat”
- Class of 1491
Not quite sure what you're trying to say, but just in case it's a "consensus can be wrong" claim like I think, (a) that wasn't science - it was an evidence-free claim, and (b) the earth being flat was not consensus even in 1491, or even a widely held belief. By around 330 BC, Aristotle provided enough empirical evidence to know the earth was round. Certainly the average even lightly educated person knew the world was round by 1491.h
It wasn’t a point that could be proven, nor argued.
I certainly understand that there was no sudden change in the nature of the world in 1492, nor was the entire populace so foolish to disbelieve.
The point is that science can only be proven or disproven to the extent that the scientific knowledge currrently exists, and within the limits of the assumptions inherent in it.
There have always been scientific things that could be proven, that were later disproven.
We don’t have to call that belief if we don’t want to. But it’s real easy to take sides in a dogmatic way.
That’s all I’ve got.
Maybe I’ll just say I believe in science. 
GameboyRMH said:dculberson said:Also, I kinda hate stuff like that necklace. Science doesn't need your "belief," that's why it's science and not religion.
Was about to mention a great quote by a famous scientist along these lines but then I thought that it seems tainted in light of recent news, and now I haz a sad
What’s the recent news your talking about?
1988RedT2 said:And... Here we go!
Plenty of people believe in evolution. It's arguably science, yet just a theory. You can't prove evolution.
Wrong. A scientific theory is not the same as the colloquial use of the word theory. A scientific theory explains phenomenon that has been thoroughly substantiated many times over.
Evolution is just the change in allele frequency over time, this has been a proven fact for over a hundred years. Evolution is some of the evidence for Darwin's Theory of Natural Selection.
https://www.britannica.com/science/scientific-theory
Two things:
1. Lighten up, collective Francis.
2. IBTL
ThunderCougarFalconGoat said:1988RedT2 said:And... Here we go!
Plenty of people believe in evolution. It's arguably science, yet just a theory. You can't prove evolution.
Wrong. A scientific theory is not the same as the colloquial use of the word theory. A scientific theory explains phenomenon that has been thoroughly substantiated many times over.
Evolution is just the change in allele frequency over time, this has been a proven fact for over a hundred years. Evolution is some of the evidence for Darwin's Theory of Natural Selection.
https://www.britannica.com/science/scientific-theory
Hi ThunderCougarFalconGoat,
The first word you typed was “Wrong”…I know it’s comforting (and profitable for many) to contend that things are definitively knowable but they aren’t…all we have is a march up a continuum of increasing likelihoods with no point so high that we’re beyond the risk of having to start over in the face of new observations.
Assuming you’re referring to earth evolution (as opposed to exoplanet evolution), we’re limited to the relatively weak tools available within the field of “historical science” which also limit our understanding of subjects like paleontology, archeology, and cosmology. Essentially, we’re seeking to understand a one-time event and as a result, by definition, we have no choice but to forfeit the confidence building effect that comes from experimental repeatability.
joey48442 said:GameboyRMH said:Was about to mention a great quote by a famous scientist along these lines but then I thought that it seems tainted in light of recent news, and now I haz a sad
What’s the recent news your talking about?
GameboyRMH said:joey48442 said:GameboyRMH said:Was about to mention a great quote by a famous scientist along these lines but then I thought that it seems tainted in light of recent news, and now I haz a sad
What’s the recent news your talking about?
Oh dang
In reply to RX Reven' :
Nope. Wrong was referring to the misuse of the colloquial use of the word theory (meaning an unproven guess) to refer to a scientific theory which is not an unproven guess. That is definitely something that is definitively knowable since we made up the language.
As far as evolution, I'm referring to how living organisms change over time. They do, its been observed in the wild and in laboratories, and is therefore fact.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=plVk4NVIUh8
Darwin's Theory of Natural Selection is what most people incorrectly call the "theory of evolution," and could be wrong if future information shows a new mechanism for change. But change still occurs.
I have no idea what you mean by earth evolution though.
And back to making my bacon soup.
This is going well.
joey48442 said:GameboyRMH said:joey48442 said:GameboyRMH said:Was about to mention a great quote by a famous scientist along these lines but then I thought that it seems tainted in light of recent news, and now I haz a sad
What’s the recent news your talking about?
Oh dang
I was unaware that anyone considered that dude a scientist.
uhh... why wouldn't you?
T.J. said:joey48442 said:GameboyRMH said:joey48442 said:GameboyRMH said:Was about to mention a great quote by a famous scientist along these lines but then I thought that it seems tainted in light of recent news, and now I haz a sad
What’s the recent news your talking about?
Oh dang
I was unaware that anyone considered that dude a scientist.
I can understand why people say “Kardashian’s? I’ve never heard of them” but this is just silliness.
Joey
joey48442 said:T.J. said:joey48442 said:GameboyRMH said:joey48442 said:GameboyRMH said:Was about to mention a great quote by a famous scientist along these lines but then I thought that it seems tainted in light of recent news, and now I haz a sad
What’s the recent news your talking about?
Oh dang
I was unaware that anyone considered that dude a scientist.
I can understand why people say “Kardashian’s? I’ve never heard of them” but this is just silliness.
Joey
Its probably because of all the scientific degrees and research articles he's published.
https://www.haydenplanetarium.org/tyson/about/cv.php
You'll need to log in to post.
