spooky3 Posted December 4, 2010 Share Posted December 4, 2010 I dont see how any of this has any relation to the OP.. Why are you you..? At the moment i'm being this me answering bemusing posts on this thread! Not quite the discussion it was yesterday... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kaimani Posted December 4, 2010 Share Posted December 4, 2010 Because of your opening post: i think i'm missing something here. what does a reproducable experiment have to do with what i said? sorry if i'm sorry if i'm being dumb. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
espadrille Posted December 4, 2010 Share Posted December 4, 2010 At the moment i'm being this me answering bemusing posts on this thread! Not quite the discussion it was yesterday... It does seem to have veered of track a bit. So have we not answered the question that the OP asked? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spooky3 Posted December 4, 2010 Share Posted December 4, 2010 i think i'm missing something here. what does a reproducable experiment have to do with what i said? sorry if i'm sorry if i'm being dumb. Accepted ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flamingjimmy Posted December 4, 2010 Share Posted December 4, 2010 i think i'm missing something here. what does a reproducable experiment have to do with what i said? sorry if i'm sorry if i'm being dumb. Basically that when you're talking about scientific evidence, ie. that which has been verified by reproducible experiments, then evidence is not subjective. I'm reminded of when people say things like 'evolution is only a theory'. There is a colloquial meaning of 'evidence' which is basically 'something that makes me think some other thing is true' which is indeed subjective and there is also a scientific meaning which is not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flamingjimmy Posted December 4, 2010 Share Posted December 4, 2010 It does seem to have veered of track a bit. So have we not answered the question that the OP asked? It'll come back around, let it flow:) Or if you like, say something insightful/objectionable/interesting that's on topic and people will probably comment Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kaimani Posted December 4, 2010 Share Posted December 4, 2010 Basically that when you're talking about scientific evidence, ie. that which has been verified by reproducible experiments, then evidence is not subjective. I'm reminded of when people say things like 'evolution is only a theory'. There is a colloquial meaning of 'evidence' which is basically 'something that makes me think some other thing is true' which is indeed subjective and there is also a scientific meaning which is not. i think this is where i was going wrong. my understanding was that that which has been verified by reproducible experiments is scientific 'fact'. and the data etc you get from the experiments would be evidence you would then use to come to conclusive fact. eg, if i may, the current global climate situation. the data people are using is more or less the same. but to some its evidence that the earth is just going through its natural cycles and to others it's evidence of global warming. am i wrong here? i ask because i really do want to know. there's no greater good, i think, than finding that something you believed and took to be gospel is wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kaimani Posted December 4, 2010 Share Posted December 4, 2010 Accepted ! thank you, kind sir:) ( or ma'am, not sure.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kaimani Posted December 4, 2010 Share Posted December 4, 2010 It'll come back around, let it flow:) Or if you like, say something insightful/objectionable/interesting that's on topic and people will probably comment good point this. the thread on the research on islamophobia was stopped because it had 'gone off topic'. i find this a little strange. surely the idea is free flow of ideas etc wherever that might take us. within reason, of course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spooky3 Posted December 4, 2010 Share Posted December 4, 2010 ... that something you believed and took to be gospel is wrong. Once again that's a belief! the current global climate situation. the data people are using is more or less the same. but to some its evidence that the earth is just going through its natural cycles and to others it's evidence of global warming. The evidence doesn't go far enough back to be conclusive enough. In addition there are various models (modes of thought) on this subject. So it's a bad example to use!!! Please get back on topic now you have an understanding of science! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.