The Scientific Method (Page 4)

AchillesHottie 
AchillesHottie: Ok, at least we have addictions in common
20 days ago Report
0
Angry Beaver
Angry Beaver: very succinctly put hating! lol
20 days ago Report
0
AchillesHottie 
AchillesHottie: "Maybe you can appreciate the fact that since neither of us are remotely qualified in the field, we shouldn't feel compelled to assert our holistic expectations of biology."


Trespassers will be shot? Doesn't 40 years of self-study in the philosophy of science while rejecting Angelina Jolie's concupiscent advances count for anything?
20 days ago Report
0
Angry Beaver
Angry Beaver: Pics or it didn;t happen
20 days ago Report
0
Angry Beaver
Angry Beaver: I'm only expert in driving freight trains and detailing cars lol
20 days ago Report
0
AchillesHottie 
AchillesHottie: "Quarks dont exist = more incoherent quackery from the psuedo-quantum philosophy department."


Has it ever happened before that unobervable postulates in scientific theories turned out to be a will-o-the-wisp?

Once? Twice? A million times?

You tell me, Miss Cokehead.
20 days ago Report
0
theHating
theHating: It counts were it counts, and subtracts overall when you come to grand misdirected conclusions.

Such as: "evolution is bollocks" and "quarks do not exist"

That is to misuse biological and quantum notation.

In other words, quackery.
20 days ago Report
0
Angry Beaver
Angry Beaver: Show us yer tits....that's REAL science
20 days ago Report
0
AchillesHottie 
AchillesHottie: I keep the real science under the mattress.... to thwart burglars
20 days ago Report
0
theHating
theHating: If you want to cite Kuhn. Fine. But to conclude that Kuhn or noam chomsky think evolution is not science or "bollocks" is to abuse the notation.
20 days ago Report
0
Angry Beaver
Angry Beaver: Yeah, dun be a Kuhnt lol
20 days ago Report
0
Angry Beaver
Angry Beaver: Is it wrong that i just cracked myself up with that one?
20 days ago Report
0
AchillesHottie 
AchillesHottie: " If you want to cite Kuhn. Fine. But to conclude that Kuhn or noam chomsky think evolution is not science or "bollocks" is to abuse the notation."


Now, you're talking rubbish. And I love you.
20 days ago Report
0
theHating
theHating: You can cite borel to point out the improbability of a single theory, but to assert that it is reasonable to conclude from your understanding of his expertise that said theory is impossible is to abuse the notation.
20 days ago Report
0
AchillesHottie 
AchillesHottie: abuse the notation? I didn't touch his notation.
20 days ago Report
0
Angry Beaver
Angry Beaver: I'll just watch, shall I?
20 days ago Report
0
theHating
theHating: I know, but others have, have tried, try and fail, and simply dont know who the fk borel even is yet cite his work anyway.
20 days ago Report
0
AchillesHottie 
AchillesHottie: Well, how about this? A serious question, Miss Hating....


How do you suggest we demarcate bona fide science from the mock turtle soup?


Have you read Larry Laudan's "Demise of the Demarcation Problem"?
20 days ago Report
0
AchillesHottie 
AchillesHottie: Please go ahead. I'll argue there is no demarcation criteria.

What will you argue for? My wife?
20 days ago Report
0
theHating
theHating: Haha
20 days ago Report
0
AchillesHottie 
AchillesHottie: Lucky for you I have the decade off
20 days ago Report
0
theHating
theHating: How's the coffee in Madagascar?
20 days ago Report
0
AchillesHottie 
AchillesHottie: I don't drink coffee

But the Three Horses beer is good
20 days ago Report
0
theHating
theHating: Maybe you gotta send a bag of that good Madagascar bean to me if I'm right.
20 days ago Report
0
Angry Beaver
Angry Beaver: Beans r the go
20 days ago Report
0