Re: KRS book: Geology

On 4 Jan 2006 22:04:53 -0800, "Daryl Krupa" <icycalmca@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

>
>Eric Stevens wrote:
>> On Tue, 3 Jan 2006 16:44:58 +0100, "Peter Alaca" <P.Alaca@xxxxxx>
>> wrote:
>
><snip>
>> You are asking that the decision as to the best match of the KRS to
>> the local greywacke be done not by Ojakangas but by his readers.
>
> But Eric, he cannot convince his readers that he is correct if he
>does not present the evidence supporting his argument.

The point is that Ojakangas conveyed his opinion to Wolter in a
private communication. We are not privy to what was conveyed verbally
and it it is not surprising if his written summeary of the results did
not conatin the deatil of a formal report.

> Scientific arguments supporting such conclusions generally include
>Discussion and Results sections.
> If only the CConclusions section is presented, then the argument
>is incomplete, and constitutes an Argument from Authority.
> This is not the way to Progress in Science.
> Viz., the Inquisition _vs._ Galileo, in which the conclusions of
>Aristotle and Ptolemy were cited as incontrovertible authority:
>
>http://library.thinkquest.org/3461/galgal_m.htm
>
>http://www.bartleby.com/66/49/24349.html
>
>> By the same argument, if you were told to find in a crowded railway
>> station the person whose description best matches 1.93m tall, 124kg
>> weight and with short red hair you would list everybody, including the
>> 1.1m dwarf with a red nose and long flowing black hair.
>
> To convince anybody that your opinion as to the identity of such
>a person was accurate, you would have to convince your inquisitors
>that you had sampled all the people in that crowded railway station.

In this case, I expect that Ojakangas had done so would be a
reasonable assumption.

> Without such an explication of your investigation procedure,
>your opinion would not stand up in court, and the entire neighbourhood
>around the railway station might have to be cordoned off so that a
>much wider-ranging search could be conducted for possible candidates
>who might have eluded your examination.
> Simply showing pictures of a few similar persons will not convince
>anybody that the real object of your search was investigated.
> You have suggewsted as gedanken-experiment akin to a line-up of
>the usual suspects; that procedure will only identify the object of
>your
>search if he happens to be standing in the line-up,
>i.e. if he happened to be included in your sample set.
> For that procedure to stand up in court, you must show that
>the prime suspect is the only person a reasonable person
>would conclude would fit the bill.
> The prime suspect's defense lawyer would likely try to argue that
>there might have been some other persons who more-reasonably
>fit the bill, who were not included in the line-up.
> Here is an example of a line-up:
>
>http://www.impawards.com/1995/posters/usual_suspects_ver3.jpg
>
>http://www.lovedungeon.net/gallery/usual/lineup-big.jpg
>
>http://images.art.com/images/-/Kevin-Spacey---The-Usual-Suspects--C10103883.jpeg
>
> (See "SPOILER ALERT", at bottom.)
>
>> >He can conclude that the krs-grauwacke probably
>> >originated in the Animikie basin, but
>> >it must always be possible for others to form an independent opinion.
><snip>
>
> Yes, that is a basic requirement in a scientific presentation of an
>opinion.
> And now, The Rest of the Story:
>
>*** SPOILER ALERT *****
>*
>*
>*
>*
>*
>*
>*
>*
>*
>*
> Be advised that
>the man on the right end
>turned out to be the actual criminal mastermind.
>
>http://www.totaldvd.net/features/discs/200205UsualSuspects.php
>
>_
>Daryl Krupa
>
>"I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God
>who has endowed us with sense, reason, and intellect
>has intended us to forgo their use."
>- Galileo Galilei
>



Eric Stevens

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: KRS book: Geology
    ... Eric Stevens wrote: ... he cannot convince his readers that he is correct if he ... To convince anybody that your opinion as to the identity of such ...
    (sci.archaeology)
  • Re: KRS book: Geology
    ... he cannot convince his readers that he is correct if he ... That speaks pretty "well" for Ojakangas and Wolter. ... >> To convince anybody that your opinion as to the identity of such ... > Eric Stevens ...
    (sci.archaeology)
  • Re: KRS book: Geology
    ... Eric Stevens wrote: ... you would have to convince your inquisitors ... The results indicating that Cold Fusion is a reality ...
    (sci.archaeology)
  • Re: Women may give birth, but its men who can handle blood...
    ... I have a theory as to why you assume everyone is jealous of you; so that you can convince ... open Usenet will be open only in so far as it doesn't offend the ... An OPINION is not something you get to argue about - ...
    (soc.men)
  • Re: Judgement Day
    ... themselves the lights which convince them of it, neglect to seek them ... and to examine thoroughly whether this opinion is one of those ...
    (sci.crypt)