"Theories are filled with guesses, but usually they are not identified as guesses. Instead, they are couched in impressive scientific terminology, hidden behind a vast veil of unimaginable time, and placed in textbooks".
Very impressive, wouldn't ya think.
Theories of The Science For Mankind
-
- Posts: 154
- Joined: Mon Mar 24, 2008 9:04 pm
- D_Archer
- Posts: 1255
- Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2009 4:01 am
- Location: The Netherlands
Re: Theories of The Science For Mankind
Well, i am glad i am not a scientist, as a philosopher i can go beyond and imagine and also intuit the workings of the cosmos without having to do 'hard science work' , i do think good science is hard work, it requires determination and direction and a sort of self-checking to make sure you continually adjust what you THINK with what the observation/data and experiments TELL YOU.
The crux of bad theories is lazy scientists.
As an example of a good scientist, look at Kristian Birkeland, he ventured to the North Pole, observed, theorized, experimented and later adjusted what he was thinking based on his experiments and he was RIGHT, although being right should not be the goal for the scientists it is the goal of later generations to recognize who was right and who the lazy posturers were.
Regards,
Daniel
The crux of bad theories is lazy scientists.
As an example of a good scientist, look at Kristian Birkeland, he ventured to the North Pole, observed, theorized, experimented and later adjusted what he was thinking based on his experiments and he was RIGHT, although being right should not be the goal for the scientists it is the goal of later generations to recognize who was right and who the lazy posturers were.
Regards,
Daniel
- Shoot Forth Thunder -
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 25 guests