Evidence & Testing in the Scientific Field (Updated 1/8)

[VoijaRisa]

EsgarBlackpoxs

So other scientists could have posted, but I am unaware of them

I know of a few other science majors who have been active in these sorts of threads. I'm not sure if any others have done any active research though.

Quote:

The mods will have turly failed us if this isn't stickied.

There's been other really good threads that don't get stickied. I linked to them at the bottom of the OP.

[Grace of light and shadow]

VoijaRisa

Grace etoiledrexl or moon

evidence can be seen as false no matter ho its looked at

Incorrect. Either an observation a) was predicted by a theory (which confirms it), b) contradicts the prediction (which causes us to reject the hypothesis), or c) wasn't predicted (in which case, we may need to add something we overlooked to the hypothesis but does not mean it's wrong).

and anyone can "see things" true it is highly unlikely but suppose everyone misreads some data or one man makes observations in a state of psychosis?

[southerndrawl118]

Grace etoiledrexl or moon

VoijaRisa

Grace etoiledrexl or moon

fun but still who is to say... god evolution... other ideals we can't prove a word of it nor call any of it false

I'd recommend you go and actually read my post. We're not talking about "proof" in an absolute sense. We're only concerning ourself with "proving beyond a reasonable doubt."

If that's good enough to execute someone for, then it's certainly good enough for acceptance as a well supported depiction of reality.

and i said so was good enough for hitler right? you have your government style logic and i have mine... and who has the right to lay acclaim to what is reasonable huh?

well, sciece can..considering that it repeatedly tests its claims and uses evidence to back it up. And as far as i can tell, you have absolutely no logic. You have yet to clearly state why science is wrong...you have however used a logical fallacy by equating evidence to hitler

[VoijaRisa]

Grace etoiledrexl or moon

and who has the right to lay acclaim to what is reasonable huh?

Only those whose claims are supported by empirical, repeatable evidence.

[southerndrawl118]

Grace etoiledrexl or moon

VoijaRisa

Grace etoiledrexl or moon

evidence can be seen as false no matter ho its looked at

Incorrect. Either an observation a) was predicted by a theory (which confirms it), b) contradicts the prediction (which causes us to reject the hypothesis), or c) wasn't predicted (in which case, we may need to add something we overlooked to the hypothesis but does not mean it's wrong).

and anyone can "see things" true it is highly unlikely but suppose everyone misreads some data or one man makes observations in a state of psychosis?

and knowing that your claim is completely unreasonable, you still make it?

[Grace of light and shadow]

Cuddle-fish

Grace etoiledrexl or moon

evidence can be seen as false no matter ho its looked at

No, evidence can be reinterpretted. However, after rpeated testing, we can be confident in our conclusions

no where in there was anything that makes me believe that we are 100% sure

[VoijaRisa]

Grace etoiledrexl or moon

and anyone can "see things" true it is highly unlikely but suppose everyone misreads some data or one man makes observations in a state of psychosis?

That's why science has the peer review process. Other people check the data of one another.

And before you make a silly claim that there's one big evil scientist conspiracy, please remember that there is extremely limited funding for science. Thus, we scientists aren't about to pass a fellow scientist so they can get the grant money we want.

[EsgarBlackpoxs]

Grace etoiledrexl or moon

Cuddle-fish

Grace etoiledrexl or moon

evidence can be seen as false no matter ho its looked at

No, evidence can be reinterpretted. However, after rpeated testing, we can be confident in our conclusions

no where in there was anything that makes me believe that we are 100% sure

It's not supposed to. Things are supposed to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt

[Grace of light and shadow]

Cuddle-fish

Grace etoiledrexl or moon

VoijaRisa

Grace etoiledrexl or moon

evidence can be seen as false no matter ho its looked at

Incorrect. Either an observation a) was predicted by a theory (which confirms it), b) contradicts the prediction (which causes us to reject the hypothesis), or c) wasn't predicted (in which case, we may need to add something we overlooked to the hypothesis but does not mean it's wrong).

and anyone can "see things" true it is highly unlikely but suppose everyone misreads some data or one man makes observations in a state of psychosis?

and knowing that your claim is completely unreasonable, you still make it?

come on get over yourselves... if you can prove to me that something cannot happen out of a situation then i will buy it but i say a meteor could hit earth at anytime without us knowing until the planet dies and for you to prove 100% that you are correct is a myth and a load of crap

and by the way you have to many variables to consider to calculate anything to the true amount it can go...

[southerndrawl118]

Grace etoiledrexl or moon

Cuddle-fish

Grace etoiledrexl or moon

evidence can be seen as false no matter ho its looked at

No, evidence can be reinterpretted. However, after rpeated testing, we can be confident in our conclusions

no where in there was anything that makes me believe that we are 100% sure

wait....so you refuse to do or believ anything unless you have 100% certainty? How exactly do you justify crossing the street?

[Grace of light and shadow]

EsgarBlackpoxs

Grace etoiledrexl or moon

Cuddle-fish

Grace etoiledrexl or moon

evidence can be seen as false no matter ho its looked at

No, evidence can be reinterpretted. However, after rpeated testing, we can be confident in our conclusions

no where in there was anything that makes me believe that we are 100% sure

It's not supposed to. Things are supposed to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt

reasonable is an opinion

[VoijaRisa]

Grace etoiledrexl or moon

no where in there was anything that makes me believe that we are 100% sure

If you'd read the OP, you'd realize that the entire point is that we're never 100% sure in science. The whole game is about who can collect the most evidence. Evolution and the Big Bang have won thus far. Most others that could be considered to be "competing" against them (ie, creationism) haven't even left the starting gate in the race to collect evidence.

If you're not going to bother reading the OP (which was required by the thread title for science's sake), then please GTFO of my thread.

[Grace of light and shadow]

Cuddle-fish

Grace etoiledrexl or moon

Cuddle-fish

Grace etoiledrexl or moon

evidence can be seen as false no matter ho its looked at

No, evidence can be reinterpretted. However, after rpeated testing, we can be confident in our conclusions

no where in there was anything that makes me believe that we are 100% sure

wait....so you refuse to do or believ anything unless you have 100% certainty? How exactly do you justify crossing the street?

i don't justify it and once more i act on what i think is likely... i won't say that our reality is impossible i just say that nothing is a fact because nothing is 100%

[southerndrawl118]

Grace etoiledrexl or moon

EsgarBlackpoxs

Grace etoiledrexl or moon

Cuddle-fish

Grace etoiledrexl or moon

evidence can be seen as false no matter ho its looked at

No, evidence can be reinterpretted. However, after rpeated testing, we can be confident in our conclusions

no where in there was anything that makes me believe that we are 100% sure

It's not supposed to. Things are supposed to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt

reasonable is an opinion

hwo about you actually read the first post before you start spouting your crap

[VoijaRisa]

Grace etoiledrexl or moon

and by the way you have to many variables to consider to calculate anything to the true amount it can go...

Funny. I'm an astronomer.

I think I'm a little more aware of the variables involved for calculating orbits than you wink