~Ann
quote:Originally posted by Saeed:
I am at the stage where I have stopped believing much from so called scientists.
quote:Originally posted by Jefffive:quote:Originally posted by Saeed:
I am at the stage where I have stopped believing much from so called scientists.
Which you say on a device designed by scientists, the signal from which was sent to space to be relayed by satellites designed and built by scientists, put there by rockets designed and built by scientists while other scientists calculated exactly where to locate them, and that can only be read by people using similar devices designed by other scientists, all of which was the stuff of science fiction 75 years ago and would have been considered magic 150 years ago...
quote:Originally posted by Saeed:quote:Originally posted by Jefffive:quote:Originally posted by Saeed:
I am at the stage where I have stopped believing much from so called scientists.
Which you say on a device designed by scientists, the signal from which was sent to space to be relayed by satellites designed and built by scientists, put there by rockets designed and built by scientists while other scientists calculated exactly where to locate them, and that can only be read by people using similar devices designed by other scientists, all of which was the stuff of science fiction 75 years ago and would have been considered magic 150 years ago...
Lots of difference my friend.
When it comes to them trying to guess what happened millions of yeaago, they are always wrong.
Next year someone will come up with another theory!
quote:Originally posted by Jefffive:quote:Originally posted by Saeed:quote:Originally posted by Jefffive:quote:Originally posted by Saeed:
I am at the stage where I have stopped believing much from so called scientists.
Which you say on a device designed by scientists, the signal from which was sent to space to be relayed by satellites designed and built by scientists, put there by rockets designed and built by scientists while other scientists calculated exactly where to locate them, and that can only be read by people using similar devices designed by other scientists, all of which was the stuff of science fiction 75 years ago and would have been considered magic 150 years ago...
Lots of difference my friend.
When it comes to them trying to guess what happened millions of yeaago, they are always wrong.
Next year someone will come up with another theory!
Which is the beauty of science. This theory is an attempt to make sense of the available facts, and seems plausible. If a new theory better explains the known facts, or new facts become known, this theory will be left behind.
quote:Originally posted by Aspen Hill Adventures:
Trunks make sense for a tall animal with a short neck that feeds on plants.
quote:Originally posted by BaxterB:quote:Originally posted by Jefffive:quote:Originally posted by Saeed:quote:Originally posted by Jefffive:quote:Originally posted by Saeed:
I am at the stage where I have stopped believing much from so called scientists.
Which you say on a device designed by scientists, the signal from which was sent to space to be relayed by satellites designed and built by scientists, put there by rockets designed and built by scientists while other scientists calculated exactly where to locate them, and that can only be read by people using similar devices designed by other scientists, all of which was the stuff of science fiction 75 years ago and would have been considered magic 150 years ago...
Lots of difference my friend.
When it comes to them trying to guess what happened millions of yeaago, they are always wrong.
Next year someone will come up with another theory!
Which is the beauty of science. This theory is an attempt to make sense of the available facts, and seems plausible. If a new theory better explains the known facts, or new facts become known, this theory will be left behind.
Thus the notion of “settled science” should never exist, correct? Yet how often is this phrase bandied about?
quote:Originally posted by Jefffive:quote:Originally posted by BaxterB:quote:Originally posted by Jefffive:quote:Originally posted by Saeed:quote:Originally posted by Jefffive:quote:Originally posted by Saeed:
I am at the stage where I have stopped believing much from so called scientists.
Which you say on a device designed by scientists, the signal from which was sent to space to be relayed by satellites designed and built by scientists, put there by rockets designed and built by scientists while other scientists calculated exactly where to locate them, and that can only be read by people using similar devices designed by other scientists, all of which was the stuff of science fiction 75 years ago and would have been considered magic 150 years ago...
Lots of difference my friend.
When it comes to them trying to guess what happened millions of yeaago, they are always wrong.
Next year someone will come up with another theory!
Which is the beauty of science. This theory is an attempt to make sense of the available facts, and seems plausible. If a new theory better explains the known facts, or new facts become known, this theory will be left behind.
Thus the notion of “settled science” should never exist, correct? Yet how often is this phrase bandied about?
Science is rarely completely "settled", thus we discover new properties and applications for stuff like electricity after a century of widespread use.
But it's settled enough that there's no danger of somebody discovering tomorrow that electricity doesn't exist.
quote:Originally posted by crbutler:quote:Originally posted by Jefffive:quote:Originally posted by BaxterB:quote:Originally posted by Jefffive:quote:Originally posted by Saeed:quote:Originally posted by Jefffive:quote:Originally posted by Saeed:
I am at the stage where I have stopped believing much from so called scientists.
Which you say on a device designed by scientists, the signal from which was sent to space to be relayed by satellites designed and built by scientists, put there by rockets designed and built by scientists while other scientists calculated exactly where to locate them, and that can only be read by people using similar devices designed by other scientists, all of which was the stuff of science fiction 75 years ago and would have been considered magic 150 years ago...
Lots of difference my friend.
When it comes to them trying to guess what happened millions of yeaago, they are always wrong.
Next year someone will come up with another theory!
Which is the beauty of science. This theory is an attempt to make sense of the available facts, and seems plausible. If a new theory better explains the known facts, or new facts become known, this theory will be left behind.
Thus the notion of “settled science” should never exist, correct? Yet how often is this phrase bandied about?
Science is rarely completely "settled", thus we discover new properties and applications for stuff like electricity after a century of widespread use.
But it's settled enough that there's no danger of somebody discovering tomorrow that electricity doesn't exist.
You are correct about that.
The problem arises when someone with letters behind their name decides to state something that is not really proven (or provable) and then tries to give it the veneer of being a fact or scientific.
Another name for hypothesis is guess.
Your posted link is taking a finding (differences in precursor species anatomy) and trying to link it to something with little proof, if it is even possibly provable.
It’s an attempt to use paleontology to justify current AGW theories. As an intellectual exercise, maybe… but how are you going to generate a reproducible experiment to test your hypothesis?
You can’t. The paleontology is the past. You can’t even be sure of conditions then.
quote:Originally posted by armbar:
Did anybody see this article? https://apple.news/ASoHV0gJKTkeZQAY-KAOfaQ
It seems absolutely ridiculous to me. Certainly a hypothesis and not a theory. Written by whom? Possibly people with an axe to grind? Anyone who has traveled to any third world country knows this isn’t how the world works in those places.
quote:Originally posted by Stonecreek:
Stop beating your head against the wall, Jeff. You're arguing with people who like a bullet that "leaves a good blood trail" -- and the longer the better.
quote:Originally posted by BaxterB:quote:Originally posted by Jefffive:quote:Originally posted by Saeed:quote:Originally posted by Jefffive:quote:Originally posted by Saeed:
I am at the stage where I have stopped believing much from so called scientists.
Which you say on a device designed by scientists, the signal from which was sent to space to be relayed by satellites designed and built by scientists, put there by rockets designed and built by scientists while other scientists calculated exactly where to locate them, and that can only be read by people using similar devices designed by other scientists, all of which was the stuff of science fiction 75 years ago and would have been considered magic 150 years ago...
Lots of difference my friend.
When it comes to them trying to guess what happened millions of yeaago, they are always wrong.
Next year someone will come up with another theory!
Which is the beauty of science. This theory is an attempt to make sense of the available facts, and seems plausible. If a new theory better explains the known facts, or new facts become known, this theory will be left behind.
Thus the notion of “settled science” should never exist, correct? Yet how often is this phrase bandied about?
quote:Originally posted by BushPeter:quote:Originally posted by BaxterB:quote:Originally posted by Jefffive:quote:Originally posted by Saeed:quote:Originally posted by Jefffive:quote:Originally posted by Saeed:
I am at the stage where I have stopped believing much from so called scientists.
Which you say on a device designed by scientists, the signal from which was sent to space to be relayed by satellites designed and built by scientists, put there by rockets designed and built by scientists while other scientists calculated exactly where to locate them, and that can only be read by people using similar devices designed by other scientists, all of which was the stuff of science fiction 75 years ago and would have been considered magic 150 years ago...
Lots of difference my friend.
When it comes to them trying to guess what happened millions of yeaago, they are always wrong.
Next year someone will come up with another theory!
Which is the beauty of science. This theory is an attempt to make sense of the available facts, and seems plausible. If a new theory better explains the known facts, or new facts become known, this theory will be left behind.
Thus the notion of “settled science” should never exist, correct? Yet how often is this phrase bandied about?
What happens when a theory remains in place after a long time, as people fail to disporve it, is that the question shifts. For example with evolution. The question shifts from 'does it exist' to 'how does it work'. Where in the past many studies focused on finding evidence for (or against) the theory of evolution, now they try to find data to see how evolution might work. This study is a good example of that.
quote:Originally posted by BushPeter:quote:Originally posted by BaxterB:quote:Originally posted by Jefffive:quote:Originally posted by Saeed:quote:Originally posted by Jefffive:quote:Originally posted by Saeed:
I am at the stage where I have stopped believing much from so called scientists.
Which you say on a device designed by scientists, the signal from which was sent to space to be relayed by satellites designed and built by scientists, put there by rockets designed and built by scientists while other scientists calculated exactly where to locate them, and that can only be read by people using similar devices designed by other scientists, all of which was the stuff of science fiction 75 years ago and would have been considered magic 150 years ago...
Lots of difference my friend.
When it comes to them trying to guess what happened millions of yeaago, they are always wrong.
Next year someone will come up with another theory!
Which is the beauty of science. This theory is an attempt to make sense of the available facts, and seems plausible. If a new theory better explains the known facts, or new facts become known, this theory will be left behind.
Thus the notion of “settled science” should never exist, correct? Yet how often is this phrase bandied about?
What happens when a theory remains in place after a long time, as people fail to disprove it, is that the question shifts. For example with evolution. The question shifts from 'does it exist' to 'how does it work'. Where in the past many studies focused on finding evidence for (or against) the theory of evolution, now they try to find data to see how evolution works. This study is a good example of that.