Re: What is a scientist?

Panties On Head wrote:
"Sorcerer" <Headmaster@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:dgPQg.32880$wg.32767@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

"Panties On Head" <No@xxxxx> wrote in message
news:mJOdnQcjcern_I7YnZ2dnUVZ_tmdnZ2d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
|> > Can a serious researcher legitimately be called a scientist if they
do
| > > not have a Ph.D. ? What if they only have a bachelor's degree?
What
if
| > > they have no degree?
|
|
| If one paints, he is a painter.
| If you bowl, you are a bowler.
| If you try to solve problems by reasoning and using scientific method,
then
| you are practicing science.
|
| Technology is a guage of the sophistication of the progress of science.
|
| Personally, I'm very receptive to anyone who imagines things regardless
of
| how kooky they are. I dont call someone a crank simply because they
imagine.
|
| But the crank meter starts to wiggle when people make bold claims of
fact.
| This is also something that I myself am guilty of - admittedly.
|
| The crank meter is going into the red zone when solid evidence is
presented
| which refutes the new ideas and the person keeps pushing those ideas.
|
| The crank meter is maxed out when proof to the contrary is ignored.
|
| Going beyond this one is more likely guilty of fraud, possibly even
criminal
| fraud. For example - to promote the idea that drinking gasoline is
healthy
| for babies because of one's personal new scientific theories.
|
| It is possible to do tremendous damage by promoting incorrect ideas, and
so
| cranks are generally frowned upon. It's seriosus stuff. But there must
| always be room for imagineers, dreamers, fools, and court jesters.
Without
| them science would never evolve.
|
| As an example, after having lobotomized approximately 1/2 million people
we
| now know that lobotomies do not help people at all, whatsoever, not even
a
| little. And that's what happens when someone like JSH is graduated
through
| medical school.


Well put.
One minor quibble.

" Technology is a guage of the sophistication of the progress of science."

I disagree.

The market is a gauge of the progress of technology.

When technology encounters scientific theory it will do one of
three things.
a) apply it.
b) ignore it.
c) side-step around it.

Examples:
a) We fly, we sent men to the moon and back, we built the bomb.
b) We are not going to visit the centre of the sun, the inside of an atom
or the edge of the universe. We do not control weather or earthquakes.
c) Ring laser gyroscopes work no matter what Einstein said.

At the end of the day it doesn't matter what Joe Sixpack believes,
it is what he buys. Tomorrow is another day.

Androcles




Quite true. And my characterization also seems to suggest that technology is
somehow cumulative. I dont think that it is. There are very few decent "old
school" machinists or carpenters left alive on this planet. Manufacturing
has become so automated that nobody needs to know anything anymore.

I think that the most important thing people can do is digitize old books.
Huge chunks of technology are simply slipping away due to market forces. All
one can do is preserve the information.

It's very sad to say farewell to the industrial revolution.

Dude, unified HEP.

Oh, excuse me, I started it.

Panties on Head, I was just talking about you the other day. Now de
Bruijn is "Lost Poster."

HTML symbols? You need Unicode. Unicode has every HTML symbol there
ever was, except HTML symbols about HTML symbols, it's a glyph set.
Actually it's a specification of mapping code pages and numbers to
glyphs, in various encodings for all the languages in the world, and
others, including made up languages like Esperanto.

The HTML symbols are called XML entities.

Ent, you know, amp, ent, less than greater than.

My question, Panties on Head, is if they are your panties.

I figure they're not, you're obviously quite happy to talk about it.

Woman can remove their underclothing without even taking their outer
clothing off.

What you need is to totally fuse the iron so it reignites.

What is a scientist? It's like your mother.

Dude, I wrote a your momms joke last night so bad I won't even bother
to remember it.

I have actually here typed it again. It would bother me to print it.

Hey, Chan-Ho Suh.

What's up?

Oh, Renfro's typing, this has to be good. Wow, there's Lee Rudolph
and
The Ghost In The Machine, Panties On Head, and Arnold Neumaier!
Alright, Neumaier he wrote the sci.physics FAQ and is very
knowledgeable.

Clowns.

I think I'm pretty much totally ignorant of what you're talking about,
the Poincare Conjecture.

Ross

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: sci.math
    ... Panties on Head, yes, I agree. ... which explains null axiom theory. ... or choice must be fundamentally inherent in set theory? ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: Does a simple magnet bend space-time?
    ... It's Rodney King! ... Was the first time because you had panties on your head? ... | not wear panties on one's head, lest he be'ith beset upon by the ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: An interesting prop bet
    ... Since he is such a scumbag, I predict he welshes on this bet. ... If he wears the panties on his head, ... NyeborgCharlies... ...
    (rec.gambling.poker)
  • Re: Does a simple magnet bend space-time?
    ... It's Rodney King! ... panties on your head, Roddy. ... Was the first time because you had panties on your head? ...
    (sci.physics)