[QUOTE="kneeha"][QUOTE="Zeviander"] Where on the "outside" are you exactly? Science as it exists today is wholly empirical and the method of falsification, where all experiments are directed towards disproving a hypothesis, rather than proving it, is extremely important in reducing bias. Things such as double-blind studies were designed so that the actual-factual science can shine through any potential human error.lx_theo
On the outside as far as not doing a lot of study into science. Man I almost don't want to say this because I kinda want this conversation to end. But I don't see how the Miller-Urey experiment was done to disprove an hypothesis and not prove it. Or the experiments trying to discover the "God Particle" . But I get what your saying, You believe that modern science is doing things as unbiased, and avoiding errors as much as possible. I'm either going to look into it more or forget my mind ever went down this train of thought. The idea of the experiment was to test whether a key portion of the hypothesis would even happen. It tested whether the formation would occur.Methods of falsification look at major and minor points in theories/hypotheses, and then proceed to test if they are even possible under the conditions put forth in the theory/hypothesis. If they fail to be shown possible, the theory/hypothesis takes a major hit. If they are not shown that way, then it ends up helping the credibility of the hypothesis/theory. Methods of falsification do not set out with a single purpose to show something is false. They set up the experiment to simply discover whether it is false or not.
You compare these types of experiments to "experiments" where people try and set up experiments/observations/whatever they hell they all them where they try to collect data that suggests the existence of things like ghosts. The difference here is of course that they are trying to bend their experiments to agree their agenda. It becomes very blatant when our understanding of the possibility of ghosts lands in the realm of nothing. Without anything to test with falsification methods, these "experiments" along with ones of any other sort of that nature are rightly scrutinized.
Some very good info I appreciate it. It's all agenda driven though. Without an agenda of some sort there are a lack of funds to experiment with. Abiogenesis was the agenda of the Miller-Urey experiment. Something never observed in nature that seems logically impossible but there goal was to prove it was at least a possibility. I don't believe in Ghosts but at least people have seen them.See you believe Ghosts are fake and are silly to believe in therefore the scientific study into the phenomena is silly. You assume that the science behind it is garbage(which it might be) but have you ever really looked into the experiments people do to prove the existence of ghosts(I haven't)? I bet not/ But you assume and judge these people as agenda driven lunies without taking a good look at the evidence. Not for scientific reason but because of your own philosophical bias.
Shoot maybe I'm wrong bro,(sure wouldn't be the first time) I don't know whats going on through your mind. But really think before you respond. A real honest self examination.
Log in to comment