New - Well, Actually Very Old - Human Ancestor Discovered

Status
Not open for further replies.
Wow. One of the things I love about good scientists is that they actually get excited when their assumptions are challenged.
 
True. Although the scientific community suffers from many of the same foibles other institutions do. The scientific method may be objective, but the people employing it are not always so.
 
Nice find. A million more years back.

Though I think they could have dignified the poor creature with a better name than "Ardi." Makes it sound like the uncovered the long lost brother of "Jughead."
 
A hypothesis is basically an assumption, albeit one made utilizing some quantity of data. Which is a starting point from which to construct an actual theory.
 
Jim Brennan said:
True. Although the scientific community suffers from many of the same foibles other institutions do. The scientific method may be objective, but the people employing it are not always so.
Click to expand...

Sure. String-Theory-versus-M-Theory being a great example.

And yet...despite all the entrenched resistance to and mockery of M-Theory, the String Crowd eventually had to adopt it...because that's where the math inexorably led them. And in the end it resolved the divisions within String Theory, too.

Well, not in-the-end, but closer-to-the-end.
 
Mark Harris said:
Good scientists do not work in assumptions at all.
Click to expand...

It's human nature to gravitate towards your pre-existing suppositions. Good scientists fight that urge.

Sad Max said:
Sure. String-Theory-versus-M-Theory being a great example.

And yet...despite all the entrenched resistance to and mockery of M-Theory, the String Crowd eventually had to adopt it...because that's where the math inexorably led them. And in the end it resolved the divisions within String Theory, too.

Well, not in-the-end, but closer-to-the-end.
Click to expand...

Even on a more basic level, the politics and maneuvering of the intellectual communities often obfuscate more than they reveal. I've known PhD's and candidates whose papers get shelved because their findings conflict with someone else's.

It all comes out in the end, but it can take longer than it should.
 
Sure. But unlike other comprehension-systems, divorced-from-reality BS does not become enshrined and acquire a patina of unquestionable truth, for centuries or millenia.
 
Ah. I see. And in this forum, there's the "no politics" and "no religion" rulings.

So certainly, repeated calling into question of "everything else" wouldn't fall into one of those categories, I hope?
 
Fascinating.

Btw, I don't think saying that logic is better than other alternatives is a political or religious comment.
 
Hence why I asked. If someone's intent is to attack the validity of other belief systems and assert the validity of his particular belief system over those other belief systems, then this thread will be locked and deleted and a stern warning issued.

That's why I asked what was intended by statements such as "Tells you something about the merits of the Scientific Method versus other ways in which people choose to arrange their ideas regarding the real world" and "unlike other comprehension-systems, divorced-from-reality BS does not become enshrined and acquire a patina of unquestionable truth, for centuries or millenia". Such statements could certainly be interpreted as meaning "science is the one and only truth" and "religion is silly divorced-from-reality BS" or whatever. Hence why I asked for clarification as to what was intended.

Religious discussions are not tolerated here, whether in support of or bashing of. Period. End of story. Full stop.
 
Barry_Green said:
Hence why I asked. If someone's intent is to attack the validity of other belief systems and assert the validity of his particular belief system over those other belief systems, then this thread will be locked and deleted and a stern warning issued.
Click to expand...

No problem there; Scientific Methodology is not a 'belief system' so I think we're all on the same page.
 
Barry_Green said:
Religious discussions are not tolerated here, whether in support of or bashing of. Period. End of story. Full stop.
Click to expand...

 Understood.

However, I don’t think that an endorsement of evidence-based reasoning automatically transforms the discussion into a religious debate.

Are sceptical DVXusers forbidden from expressing our (non-religious/non-political) views on how we believe facts should be established during discussions on homeopathy, astrology, dowsing, Bigfoot… resolution charts, sensor-sizes, etc.?

DP

 
I don't believe in sensor-sizes it's just another plot to scare me into buying things I don't really need like tooth paste and matte boxes... bah humbug!
 
Okay, then let me make it REALLY SIMPLE for everyone:

Discuss politics or religion, and you'll find yourself banned. Bash someone else's political views or religious views, and you'll find yourself banned. Maybe for a day, maybe for a week, maybe for a month.

These are the posted rules of the forum. Compliance would be oh so appreciated. Thanks all.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top