Outline ·
[ Standard ] ·
Linear+
Sociology Public understanding of science.
|
robertngo
|
Oct 11 2010, 07:28 AM
|
|
the common spin is that science are weak and they will point out some fraud and apparent incompleteness of science and proceed to science cannot replace such or such mumbo jumbo they believe in while never proving their stuff ever work.
i think it is getting worst, the age of reason have not really arrived.
This post has been edited by robertngo: Oct 11 2010, 07:29 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
robertngo
|
Oct 19 2010, 12:03 PM
|
|
QUOTE(Searingmage @ Oct 19 2010, 09:30 AM) As I mention, I view it as a possibility, not as the final answer. Because if we accept it as a final answer, then we won't be any different from those who reject TOE. Once we accept something as final, it would be very difficult to change our thinking even if someone else proved it false. Also, another thing I would like to mention is, I believe evolution happen, and this happen is beyond doubt. However, the question that arise is, does macro evolution happen (as Darwin's TOE suggested)? Or only micro evolution have occurred? "I hate to say this but it's due in part of religion. Religion was opposed to the idea of the earth revolving around the sun. It took several hundred years and several near-deaths of prominent scientists but eventually we reached the point where it is no longer debatable (ie we built telescopes and went into space). " That's why I mean, until it can reach a point where it is no longer debatable, there exist other possibilities, no? debatable need to mean debatable with scientific evidence and study, not like the creationist argument that did not produce evidence but demand to be treated as am legitimate theory.
|
|
|
|
|