View Single Post


November 23rd, 2013, 17:08
Originally Posted by Roq View Post
You say that science doesn't deal with "facts" and then you go on to talk about "proofs". Shows how much you know about the scientific method. As I have made clear throughout this thread (and earlier in the post you comment on!), you should read it before commenting, technically there are no facts *or* proofs in science and can never be, it's just that many scientists, not being that pernickety, tend to refer to the best established theories such as relativity, evolution and big bang as facts, because they are thought to be as close to the truth as we are ever likely to get…
DTE wrote it before but I will write it again: it's hubris and blind arrogance to think that we are close to any kind of "truth". Reminds me professor Philipp von Jolly who told Max Planck in 1874 that there was little point in pursuing an interest in physics. Jolly is credited with the words "In this field, almost everything is already discovered, and all that remains is to fill a few holes."

Originally Posted by Roq View Post
It's important not to get too hung up on language, because words are used in different ways in different contexts.
Normally I would say that it's true. But, in your case, I think that you are are using "loose" language so you can try to wiggle out when cornered.
zahratustra is offline




Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 2,528