- Posts: 4508
- Thank you received: 7
Maybe Not All Scientists Are To Be Trusted
19 Jun 2011 13:30 #29
by ScienceChic
:goodpost:
Just look at any scientific paper, and the references listed of the previous research that that paper has built upon, proves that scientists do not "disown" previous scientists' work, rather they acknowledge it, and discover answers to the questions brought forth by previous work (because for every answer comes many new questions and lines of investigation). The only scientists called charlatans or fakes are ones who are caught fabricating data. Certainly there is much in science that is investigated and discarded because it is a process of discovery and elimination, but that doesn't make the people who have done the investigations fakes. You can't know a thing until you test it - that is the very nature of science, you formulate a hypothesis of what you think a result will be, then devise and experiment that will test that specific idea, and give a result. The result isn't always what's it expected, but still it provides knowledge. The beauty of science is then taking that result and asking oneself, "What does this mean?" and how do I devise the next test? It requires creativity to devise experiments that will answer the question without introducing error from uncontrolled variables, so yes, it is a human endeavor, full of mistakes, frustrations, short-sightedness, a varying degree of understanding by each scientist and by the field of study, and hopes as well, but the knowledge gained is just that, and nothing more.
All technology is built upon scientific knowledge, principles, and discoveries. It takes gaining an understanding of basic physical properties of our world and universe in order to manipulate them and create such tools as LED lights, television sets, radios, pacemakers, sonar, MRIs, DNA sequencing, etc. The next generation of encryption, which seems on the surface that it will be un-hackable, will be a result of gaining more insight into quantum mechanics, such as entanglement, and building devices that can utilize such physical properties. The reason people say it separately is because technology, by itself, is not science; rather, it came from science. Science itself utilizes technology, but is not technology in and of itself - it is the accumulation of knowledge through a standard method of discovery. It does not matter that it is pursued by infallible humans, because knowledge is knowledge - when 20 different people can do the same experiment and come up with the same result, it is because that natural property does not change. Nature itself is always changing, on a micro and macro level, but the processes through which it does this are the same at the atomic, and subatomic levels.
"Now, more than ever, the illusions of division threaten our very existence. We all know the truth: more connects us than separates us. But in times of crisis the wise build bridges, while the foolish build barriers. We must find a way to look after one another as if we were one single tribe.” -King T'Challa, Black Panther
The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it. ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is. ~Winston Churchill
Replied by ScienceChic on topic Maybe Not All Scientists Are To Be Trusted
Rockdoc Franz wrote:
major bean wrote: There is a very slim thread of accurate assumption about related/co-dependent "science" which has always advanced science to our present day. But this very slim thread has always been surrounded by a huge body of assumption which has been utter nonsense. Jay Bronowski had a wonderful TV series that ran on PBS back in the early 70s which dealt with this interdependent scientific development as it related to technology.
First of all we cannot equate technology with science. They are two different things. That is why the word "and" was invented. We always speak of "science AND technology", and this is accurate.
Science is a totally human activity. So it always reflects the human characteristics of fallacy, shortsightedness, deceit, conceit, stupidity, lack of information, etc (ad infinitum). The natural world and its phenomena NEVER changes, but the intellectual activity (science) carried on by humans that is designed to discover information about the natural world DOES change.
Each generation of scientists disown previous scientists who have been deemed (by consensus) as inaccurate. Those previous scientists who have been fortunate enough to have followed the slim threads to advancement are held up as the only true scientists, while the vast majority of previous researchers are ignored and called charlatans, fakes, or pseudo-scientists. This keeps "science" as pure and unfallible for the "true believers".
My wife is not feeling well this morning, so I guess that I will have to go open a vein on her to relieve her of the bad spirits. then I will hang a garland of flowers on her head to give her better humors. Ah! There is nothing like science.
Rockdoc Franz, you do not seem to know how science works.
Obviously, by your perspective I do not know how science works. "The natural world and its Phenomena NEVER change" pretty accurately reflect your ignorance on science in general. The natural world is in constant flux. This is true because organisms keep adapting to various pesticides making them that much more resistive. Of course, the concept of organic evolution must be lost on you. Then there is the matter of chemical evolution of planets, the atmosphere and our oceans. So tell me how the natural world NEVER changes.
If you find that previous researchers are ignored, you once again fail to understand how science works. The understandings of today are built on the foundation of research done by previous researchers whom you would like to call anything but scientists. If you actually read to educate yourself, much new research and thought is taking place in astronomy these days. Tomorrows scientists will stand on the shoulders of your so called "called charlatans, fakes, or pseudo-scientists". They are the ones who toil on the little things that eventually are assimilated and synthesized into "slim threads to advancement". This is why when scientific papers get written, the previous contributions by scientists are referenced and given credit. You truly have no inkling of how science truly works, but a very warped perspective that does not even come close to reality.
Further to think that science and technology are separate entities merely underscores your incredible ignorance. Without scientists known as physicists, blue ray technology, laser technology, computer technology, etc. would not exist. All are based on scientific research into fundamentals. Space missions and the science associated with it have fundamental impact on medicine and a host of other technologies.
I shall refrain to comment on your wife's condition and how you would treat her. I hope you and she have a great day.
:goodpost:Just look at any scientific paper, and the references listed of the previous research that that paper has built upon, proves that scientists do not "disown" previous scientists' work, rather they acknowledge it, and discover answers to the questions brought forth by previous work (because for every answer comes many new questions and lines of investigation). The only scientists called charlatans or fakes are ones who are caught fabricating data. Certainly there is much in science that is investigated and discarded because it is a process of discovery and elimination, but that doesn't make the people who have done the investigations fakes. You can't know a thing until you test it - that is the very nature of science, you formulate a hypothesis of what you think a result will be, then devise and experiment that will test that specific idea, and give a result. The result isn't always what's it expected, but still it provides knowledge. The beauty of science is then taking that result and asking oneself, "What does this mean?" and how do I devise the next test? It requires creativity to devise experiments that will answer the question without introducing error from uncontrolled variables, so yes, it is a human endeavor, full of mistakes, frustrations, short-sightedness, a varying degree of understanding by each scientist and by the field of study, and hopes as well, but the knowledge gained is just that, and nothing more.
All technology is built upon scientific knowledge, principles, and discoveries. It takes gaining an understanding of basic physical properties of our world and universe in order to manipulate them and create such tools as LED lights, television sets, radios, pacemakers, sonar, MRIs, DNA sequencing, etc. The next generation of encryption, which seems on the surface that it will be un-hackable, will be a result of gaining more insight into quantum mechanics, such as entanglement, and building devices that can utilize such physical properties. The reason people say it separately is because technology, by itself, is not science; rather, it came from science. Science itself utilizes technology, but is not technology in and of itself - it is the accumulation of knowledge through a standard method of discovery. It does not matter that it is pursued by infallible humans, because knowledge is knowledge - when 20 different people can do the same experiment and come up with the same result, it is because that natural property does not change. Nature itself is always changing, on a micro and macro level, but the processes through which it does this are the same at the atomic, and subatomic levels.
"Now, more than ever, the illusions of division threaten our very existence. We all know the truth: more connects us than separates us. But in times of crisis the wise build bridges, while the foolish build barriers. We must find a way to look after one another as if we were one single tribe.” -King T'Challa, Black Panther
The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it. ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is. ~Winston Churchill
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Time to create page: 0.195 seconds
sponsors
