Jump to content

"Science is all just guessing"


kana_marie
 Share

Recommended Posts

I'm bringing this up here become I believe it's safe to assume everyone (or at least close) are science minded.

 

I recently heard a grown man exclaim that he doesn't like science because "it's all just guessing". I was dumbfounded to say the least. It made me think about the current "war on science" going on all around us. If you're thinking about a comparison between now and when people were getting burned at the stake for science, you may be more accurate than you realize. 1 out of every 4 people questioned believe the sun revolves around the Earth.

 

Is this really what our society has become?? What happened here?? I never imagined I would see the day...

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 25
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I would tend to agree about the guessing part. If we would eliminate the guessers and theories, then maybe we could get science back on track. There is a big difference between "What is" and "What we want it to be".

 

The Michelson Morley experiment can be interpreted to show the earth sits dead still in space. So I can sympathize with those that believe the sun rotates about the earth. But it is just an interpretation. Perhaps the experiment is really telling us that extra dimensions exist. And all we have to do is accept that and move in a direction towards comprehension using fact based observation. Rather than manufactured personal bias and belief.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it's more fair to say that science, by and large, is educated guessing. The scientific method is how it's done. You see something that happens, you make a guess (hypothesis), you test it, then you refine your hypothesis if needed. I can understand why the man might not like science, since I don't really like dealing with uncertainties myself. But let's be honest, we're constantly dealing with uncertainties. Typically, the best we can hope for are reasonable certainties. I'm reasonably certain the laptop I'm typing on is indeed actually here, and not a hallucination. I'm reasonably certain the Earth revolves around the Sun. Maybe the guy didn't like the still experimental, undecided aspects of science. Or maybe he's just ignorant.

 

To be sure, there are a lot of things we're still guessing and wondering about in the realm of science. Quantum physics and cosmology come to my mind. But that's the very point of scientific inquiry: to figure out what stuff does and why it does it.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm bringing this up here become I believe it's safe to assume everyone (or at least close) are science minded.

I recently heard a grown man exclaim that he doesn't like science because "it's all just guessing". I was dumbfounded to say the least. It made me think about the current "war on science" going on all around us. If you're thinking about a comparison between now and when people were getting burned at the stake for science, you may be more accurate than you realize. 1 out of every 4 people questioned believe the sun revolves around the Earth.

 

Is this really what our society has become?? What happened here?? I never imagined I would see the day...

Unfortunately this is what has become of American society. It's not necessarily what has become of world society in general. As I posted a week or so ago, students receiving their teaching certificate in America today are long on quoting progressive political philosophy but can't do (let alone teach) math, biology of physics. You can see the results on this forum. We just had an asinine debate a few days ago over whether the Earth is the center of the solar system or if its the sun. They were serious! That's the hilarious part. They were dead serious. Un fracking believable. America is doomed.

 

In California, where the progressives have a stranglehold on the public education system, 52% of the entire State budget funds the State Department of Education. And they cry that it isn't enough while they turn out functional illiterates with not just high school diplomas but UC/Cal State baccalaureate degrees. Math and science are hard - so they get a degree in environmental studies aka Voodoo because its an easy major and a BA is a BA.

 

The only place that you're incorrect in the above post is "it's safe to assume everyone (or at least close) are science minded." Not even close. There's Ray and me and then you have to give it some deep thought to find a third one. There aren't even three people on the forum who know what a scientific theory is. Fruitbat #1 will say its just a guess or an opinion and then give you a personal psychotic theory of how science really works. OMFG. And he's serious as well.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In California, where the progressives have a stranglehold on the public education system, 52% of the entire State budget funds the State Department of Education. And they cry that it isn't enough while they turn out functional illiterates with not just high school diplomas but UC/Cal State baccalaureate degrees. Math and science are hard - so they get a degree in environmental studies aka Voodoo because its an easy major and a BA is a BA.

Yep. And I am in an interesting position to see exactly what Darby is talking about here. I regularly teach both the introductory freshman course in Aerospace Engineering (ARO 101 - Introduction to Aeronautics), and I also regularly teach a senior elective (ARO 499 - Model Based System Architecture). I understand that one part of my job in teaching the freshman course is to not pass those students who simply cannot do the work or who are not putting in the time and effort to do it properly. It is not surprising how closely each class of 30 students fits the Gaussian distribution grading curve. And yes, that means I regularly fail 2, sometimes even 3, out of every 30 students because they show clear evidence that they do not have what it takes to become an engineer.

 

However, what I have been seeing in my senior classes over the last 5+ years is that more and more students are making it through to senior year that, in my opinion, should never have gotten that far. It would seem other teachers in the freshman and sophomore curriculum are not weeding students out, but perhaps are coddling them and letting them pass through with C's and (heaven forbid!) B's in the foundational courses. 10 years ago I never saw this. And back in the 80s when I graduated from the same Cal Poly, Pomona Aerospace Engineering program, we also did not see this because, for one thing, the senior classes were a LOT smaller. There was a LOT more weeding out going on in the earlier years of the curriculum. I am quite sure that there are people who will walk with their degree who I would not deem fit to really do the work in the aerospace industry. And if they do get hired on somewhere, it is going to be left to their employers to fill in the gaps in their abilities, if they even want to bother.

 

The only place that you're incorrect in the above post is "it's safe to assume everyone (or at least close) are science minded." Not even close. There's Ray and me and then you have to give it some deep thought to find a third one. There aren't even three people on the forum who know what a scientific theory is. Fruitbat #1 will say its just a guess or an opinion and then give you a personal psychotic theory of how science really works. OMFG. And he's serious as well.

To be fair, there are a couple more who have a reasonable view of how science really works. Gpa definitely gets it and I have seen him regularly call out sloppy thinking. And even though Mylo.x introduced that weird topic about the sun revolving around the earth, he usually has an appropriate view of what constitutes a scientific approach as opposed to what is baloney. Through the years we have had some fair minded scientific people pop in for awhile, but I agree with Darby that they are often short lived because they see what usually amounts to "critical thinking" here by a lot of people leaves a lot to be desired.

 

RMT

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm really flustered right now, so I apologize if that comes across in my post. When I get flustered I tend to get tongue tied and make even less sense than usual. I don't understand how this happened. In elementary school we were discouraged from making models of the solar system for the science fair because it was so simple and so overdone. Now I wonder if a child wouldn't be ostracized if they were to turn one in. Maybe I'm just becoming an old fogie, but I don't see how taking the most basic scientific knowledge out of our schools is going to lead to anything good. This really depresses me. Also, without science you can't have time travel. I just wanted to throw that in there.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only place that you're incorrect in the above post is "it's safe to assume everyone (or at least close) are science minded." Not even close. There's Ray and me and then you have to give it some deep thought to find a third one. There aren't even three people on the forum who know what a scientific theory is. Fruitbat #1 will say its just a guess or an opinion and then give you a personal psychotic theory of how science really works. OMFG. And he's serious as well.

I disagree with the statement that says because someone is in learning mode and isn't a self proclaimed scientist that they are automatically a "fruitbat". You basically called 98% of the users here a fruitbat, and as far as I know, being a scientist is not a requirement to participate in these forums.

 

Some people are opening their minds and speculating about things using their own thoughts. Perhaps, if you are such an expert, you could be more respectful and perhaps teach some critical thinking skills rather than put down every person who doesn't have a PhD in Astro Physics. Every person at every level is welcome here and allowed to post, whether they have papers to back up their theories or not.

 

I again pose the question --- Why does it anger you so much? Were you bullied as a child? Perhaps a parent called you stupid when you knew you weren't? If you need to talk, we'll all listen.

 

Someone similar to you discouraged me from becoming an engineer at age 19. He was a college professor who told me I wasn't welcome in the Digital Logic Design class because I was the only female. I was devastated. I was young, vulnerable, and impressionable. To make a long story short, I quit and majored in Business. Biggest mistake of my life.

 

Your behavior here can discourage a young person from pursuing their dreams. I am simply asking that you allow "beginners" to speculate and others to think. Gentle prompting from you could be helpful if it is done so in a respectful manner, but EVERYONE should be encouraged to post here, not just Doctorates!

 

Paula

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Complete over-reaction, not to mention mis-attribution (I did not use the term "fruitbat" and I am quite sure the person who did use it did NOT mean to apply it to everyone here).

 

You may not think that I encourage people here, but I do. You can ask Ruthless, for one. But there are some folks that I try to encourage (e.g. timetunnel in his thread about time travel with wheels) who refuse to actually learn the how and why of science and mathematics, and no matter how much you show them their beliefs are unfounded, they will continue on with their "fruitbat" beliefs which are counter to established scientific facts.

 

And BTW, I go out of my way to encourage and support women in my aerospace engineering classes. In fact, if one were to claim I am biased, they would be right....I am biased in such a way that I provide MORE attention and help to women than I do to men.

 

So I would appreciate it if you did not generalize about me, when you know very little about me. And I'd ask you to refrain from doing that about Darby, as well. Thanks,

 

RMT

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Complete over-reaction, not to mention mis-attribution (I did not use the term "fruitbat" and I am quite sure the person who did use it did NOT mean to apply it to everyone here).

You may not think that I encourage people here, but I do. You can ask Ruthless, for one. But there are some folks that I try to encourage (e.g. timetunnel in his thread about time travel with wheels) who refuse to actually learn the how and why of science and mathematics, and no matter how much you show them their beliefs are unfounded, they will continue on with their "fruitbat" beliefs which are counter to established scientific facts.

 

And BTW, I go out of my way to encourage and support women in my aerospace engineering classes. In fact, if one were to claim I am biased, they would be right....I am biased in such a way that I provide MORE attention and help to women than I do to men.

 

So I would appreciate it if you did not generalize about me, when you know very little about me. And I'd ask you to refrain from doing that about Darby, as well. Thanks,

 

RMT

Sorry, my post was for Darby. I can't go back and edit. Apologies.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry, my post was for Darby. I can't go back and edit. Apologies.

@PaulaJedi, I fixed your quote :)

 

I can see where @Darby and @RainmanTime are coming from, but I also see where Paula and other who have a genuine interest and passion can get discouraged, feel shot down or not understand how they can further understand something they're incorrect about based on the voice/language/tone of some of the replies they get.

 

There are absolutely some fruitbats running around who will refuse to entertain any new information that doesn't fit their expectations, but I'm confident they're a vocal minority.

 

I think it would be cool if TTI were able to provide a kind of beginner's curriculum or resources that allowed newcomers or amateurs to "get up to speed" and be able to discuss their ideas at a higher level... I certainly don't have the expertise necessary to come up with that kind of content, but if someone was willing to provide that for me I could put together a section for it on the site and allow them to maintain it :)

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On the "Science is just a guess" topic, especially the part about the Earth being stationary, Seems to me that if the Sun orbited the Earth the gravitational effects would produce entirely different results - based on mathematical calculations with the other "observable" objects in the solar system. And as visually confirmed by the use of Voyager and Cassini space craft. Or is that all not scientific enough ?

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it would be cool if TTI were able to provide a kind of beginner's curriculum or resources that allowed newcomers or amateurs to "get up to speed" and be able to discuss their ideas at a higher level... I certainly don't have the expertise necessary to come up with that kind of content, but if someone was willing to provide that for me I could put together a section for it on the site and allow them to maintain it :)

 

I like this idea a lot, Cosmo! I gotta say, I feel like a small fish here... lol :)

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it would be cool if TTI were able to provide a kind of beginner's curriculum or resources that allowed newcomers or amateurs to "get up to speed" and be able to discuss their ideas at a higher level... I certainly don't have the expertise necessary to come up with that kind of content, but if someone was willing to provide that for me I could put together a section for it on the site and allow them to maintain it :)

I like this idea a lot, Cosmo! I gotta say, I feel like a small fish here... lol :)

 

You should still not be afraid to "think out loud"; you don't have to be scientist to discuss your thoughts, just like you did with the soul post. :) Also, IMHO, if Hawking isn't here, there are no "experts" here, either. As I've said, we are all at different levels. Cosmo has never once said that everyone has to be working on their thesis to have a conversation here. Nobody should be put down because they are speculating.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On the "Science is just a guess" topic, especially the part about the Earth being stationary, Seems to me that if the Sun orbited the Earth the gravitational effects would produce entirely different results - based on mathematical calculations with the other "observable" objects in the solar system. And as visually confirmed by the use of Voyager and Cassini space craft. Or is that all not scientific enough ?

My perception on this is: How scientific is a belief? When data to the contrary of a belief is ignored.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Science is more than guessing though. Yea, you have "guesses" in which you create a hypothesis and guess at the outcome of what will happen. But then you back up that guess through the scientific method and experiment, and collect data that correlates with your original guess for right or wrong. And then change your guess to fit in with the data you've collected. So it's more than just guessing. If scientists just guessed at how everything worked, they'd be working in marketing.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Science is more than guessing though. Yea, you have "guesses" in which you create a hypothesis and guess at the outcome of what will happen. But then you back up that guess through the scientific method and experiment, and collect data that correlates with your original guess for right or wrong. And then change your guess to fit in with the data you've collected. So it's more than just guessing. If scientists just guessed at how everything worked, they'd be working in marketing.

It is actually not guessing at all, and it is even more strict than what you say here. In between the formulation of a hypothesis and the prediction of some outcome of what will happen is the part where the mathematics come in. It is incumbent upon the theorist (if they are to be considered to be performing actual science) to quantify their hypothesis in the language of science, which is mathematics. By quantifying the theory in mathematical terms you are showing a predictable, testable foundation for how you arrived at your predictions.

 

RMT

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How can you say that a beginner of a topic is ignoring data when they may have never seen it? They need to be politely directed in the right direction without ridicule or insults.

There was no ridicule or insulting. My reply reinforced the the starter of the thread, and was directed at KerrTexas. KerrTexas is making the assertion that the Earth rotates about the Sun because there is data to support that position. But the position is not scientific because there is suppressed data. The Michelson-Morley experiment favors the stationary Earth position. So we have two conflicting groups of data. A scientific approach would be to incorporate all the data into an explanation. That isn't being done. Real science does not throw out data in order to support ones position.

 

The original Einstein did the same thing with his Equivalence Principal. He asserted that there is no difference between the effects of gravitational weight and inertial weight. But additional data was ignored showing the two types of weight are unique unto one another. Inertial weight can only exist in the presence of an inertial acceleration. Gravitational weight only exists in the absence of acceleration.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm bringing this up here become I believ?e it's safe to assume everyone (or at least close) are science minded.

I recently heard a grown man exclaim that he doesn't like science because "it's all just guessing". I was dumbfounded to say the least. It made me think about the current "war on science" going on all around us. If you're thinking about a comparison between now and when people were getting burned at the stake for science, you may be more accurate than you realize. 1 out of every 4 people questioned believe the sun revolves around the Earth.

 

Is this really what our society has become?? What happened here?? I never imagined I would see the day...

Science is all about discovery and in order to discover something there has to be an element of guessing, just as there has to be an element of luck, an element of imagination, an element of doubt and a process of elimination.

 

All of sciences major discoveries began with guessing until all the elements listed above were processed and the guessing was turned in to fact. All proven scientific discoveries are science fact, all those scientific theories yet to be proven are science fiction, many have the potential to become science fact.

 

The man who claimed that science is ''all just guessing'' is extremely ill informed and has given no thought to his statement. For example, fifty years ago heart transplants were just a dream (science fiction) now they are commonplace. Are those highly skilled cardiac surgeons that carry out such procedures just guessing? Of course they are not, heart transplants are a result of pioneering scientific research encompassing all the elements i have discussed which has turned science fiction in to science fact.

 

There are still people around who believe the earth is flat, some ignorant minds will never be changed, even in the face of overwhelming evidence.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There was no ridicule or insulting. My reply reinforced the the starter of the thread, and was directed at KerrTexas. KerrTexas is making the assertion that the Earth rotates about the Sun because there is data to support that position. But the position is not scientific because there is suppressed data. The Michelson-Morley experiment favors the stationary Earth position. So we have two conflicting groups of data. A scientific approach would be to incorporate all the data into an explanation. That isn't being done. Real science does not throw out data in order to support ones position.

The original Einstein did the same thing with his Equivalence Principal. He asserted that there is no difference between the effects of gravitational weight and inertial weight. But additional data was ignored showing the two types of weight are unique unto one another. Inertial weight can only exist in the presence of an inertial acceleration. Gravitational weight only exists in the absence of acceleration.

Ok, I was speaking generally, but you were talking about the original discussion. My bad.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...