Re: Scientists "reaching" when it comes to "Deep Impact"
- From: Chris L Peterson <clp@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 01 Jul 2005 21:22:21 GMT
On Fri, 01 Jul 2005 21:42:59 +0100, Martin Brown
<|||newspam|||@nezumi.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>There never is 100% proof of anything in science. If you want absolute
>certainty you have to be a mathematician or a religious nutcase.
I think you are mis-stating things a little in this case. Scientific
theories can't be "proven", but the discussion here is about
observations. Observations can be about as conclusive as anything can
get (although they don't have to be).
>It is this lack of absolute proof in science that allows the
>pathological liars in the White House to pretend that global warming is
>"unproven" and the tobacco industry to use very clever legalistic jargon
>to convince Joe six pack that smoking does not cause cancer.
Again, I would separate observation from theory. Global warming is an
observation that can't be refuted by any rational person (which explains
why certain world leaders deny its existence). This is quite different
from using the lack of absolute proof in scientific theories to argue
that warming isn't anthropogenic. While the evidence very strongly
favors that theory, the small amount of remaining doubt can be used by
some to justify their beliefs.
[NOTE: I'm not trying to start a discussion here about global warming!
I'm just using this example to distinguish between observations and
theories- two components of science that are often confused.]
_________________________________________________
Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
http://www.cloudbait.com
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Scientists "reaching" when it comes to "Deep Impact"
- From: TheOvavas
- Re: Scientists "reaching" when it comes to "Deep Impact"
- From: AstroHoney
- Re: Scientists "reaching" when it comes to "Deep Impact"
- References:
- Re: Scientists "reaching" when it comes to "Deep Impact"
- From: RichA
- Re: Scientists "reaching" when it comes to "Deep Impact"
- From: Martin Brown
- Re: Scientists "reaching" when it comes to "Deep Impact"
- Prev by Date: "Deep Impact" mission; designed to deceive?
- Next by Date: Update on B8
- Previous by thread: Re: Scientists "reaching" when it comes to "Deep Impact"
- Next by thread: Re: Scientists "reaching" when it comes to "Deep Impact"
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|