Scientific Truth- becareful out there

Scientific Truth
Douglas Eagleson, 2005

A tank.

A certain contents are to
be inferred. Making the
proper kind of test for truth
the question in this certain
case and in general.

A certain true test outcome
is verifiable by the filler of the
tank.

And so given the truth model,
future tests may be confidently
conducted.

So take the tank to the proper
location and turn on the
experimental apparatus.

And the outcome is a computer
printout.

And so given the computer test
for truth, all truths are
to be likewise tested.

A kind of truth not ever to
be inferred is the tank contents
without the computer printout.

Making the cause of the truth
a proper experimental design.

And here is the dilemma. How
are all experiments to be designed
given a single successful test?

Making the true experiment the
new kind to be tested.

An experiment among all possible
becomes the truth to be tested.

Making the selection the meaning
of the correctness. And here the
selection is either a rather list like
approach or the selection in relation
to the knowledge placed in science.

A set of all experiments is therefor
either inferrable in all science
or not. Making the cause of the
correct test the apparatus success
or the scientific inferences success.

And so the tank filler is to either
be the cause of truth or not.

And the inference of the tank filler
in proper content identification is
introduced to resolve.

A science of tank filling is certain
to be necessary. And the truth in
identification is compared to the
complexity of the apparatus.

A word assigned to the newly discovered
substance was the means of identifying
the common unknown tank contents.

Making the apparatus test for the common
identifier of the unknown.

And the single apparatus to both
fill the tank and identify the contents
appears the cause of the inference
of truth.

Making the outcome of the test
a cause.

And so the design of all tests was
related to the inference. A selection
of the inference causes the truth or the
inference itself.

Making the inference of apparatus selection
distinct from the apparatus test inference.

And so the filler of the tank was asked
to identify the substance. And the science's
common unique property was found the answer.

A scientist of tanks was found to be
both the filler and the content tester.

Many times such availablity was found
and the open knowledge of the sciences
allowed all to becomes the tester or
causer of the inference's truth.

A selection of the knowledge as opposed to
the outcome of the science's, as all or science's,
inference becomes the dilemma.

And to cause the solution is to
cause the tank to contain without
relation to any science. And to
then ask the scientist to identify
or exclude its placement in science.

Making the capacity to test a scientific
truth.

A test's success as any kind of test
is provable. Making the proof the
cause of truth.

And here the abstract test is proven
capable of causing the truth.

A certain test and the abstract test
are both inferrably successful.

Making the abstract inference the
cause of truth in the end.

A true inference is the relation
of the outcome of all inference
to the proof of inference itself.

And the test for the inference
itself is the common truth
appearing to neither negate
nor not negate.

A true inference is the kind
not the usage.

And the kind as the usage
selected from the list
of the science is seen distinct
from the kind among all
of the science of inference.

Making the truth common among science
necessarily the truth common
to the proof of inference.

And so this example is used to
demonstated the dilemma of scientific
truth.

A content filled in a scientific
fashion is distinct from the
unscientific filling.

A scientific paradox is this example
and the resolution is to learn
the truth of all inference's proper
selection.

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: (OT) Rev. Jeremiah Wright Isnt The Problem
    ... What you REALLY mean is that your tank is empty, ... you know what was printed was the truth, and like your loser buddies, ...
    (rec.outdoors.rv-travel)
  • Re: Inference and evidence
    ... about the truth of observations that we cannot make. ... It's not really clear what is meant by a "reliable inference." ... "reliable inferences" are those that are based on 'consistent' ... consistent with the evidence and one that allows one to ask further ...
    (talk.origins)
  • The best place to hide and Disclaimer
    ... before God what I actually do determine as important or as the truth. ... I shall correct them without prejudice when I learn the proper truth. ... one needs to filter through the lies (of satan). ...
    (soc.culture.usa)
  • Re: Inference and evidence
    ... about the truth of observations that we cannot make. ... At least Harshman is being intellectually honest here. ... It's not really clear what is meant by a "reliable inference." ... Unfortunately if the conjecture describes events ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Inference and evidence
    ... science has eschewed the objective truth since the Enlightenment. ... 'Secular science' is the ONLY source of objective truth available to us. ... a reliable inference is an inference of the same general type that has proved reliable in the past. ... Deductive inference does not give any opportunity for the real world to inform our reasoning. ...
    (talk.origins)