Gold and Silver Juniors, Mid-tiers and Producers Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Gold/Mining/Energy : Gold and Silver Juniors, Mid-tiers and Producers

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Claude Cormier who wrote (15253)	7/5/2006 1:58:04 PM
From: LLCF	Read Replies (3) of 78416

<BTW, a PHD climatologist convince that Al Gore is right, is no different than a goldbug who believes gold is going to $2000> Wise words... how many PHD's thought Vioxx was proven safe & effective. And from the poster answering you: <Yes both could be wrong but one has the knowledge and training to look at the data, determine their relevance, make reasonable conclusions.> Sadly, the belief that PHD's are always able to do this is a BIG problem IMHO. IMHO the lack of forthrightness in the scientific community when dealing with the difficulties showing "scientific proof" of cause and effect in dealing with various (non-linear) systems is a MAJOR problem in important issues today. Climactic, economic, and biological (health) systems are all poorly understood systems that are non-linear and virtually impossible to find repeatable causality for many of the variables deemed important. It's becoming clear that there is SUBSTANTIAL DOWNSIDE in this undue dependence on "the scientific method" the way currently practiced... that downside was made crystal clear by the tobbacco companies successfully arguing for decades that smoking was "safe" using the inability of the scientific method to show cause and effect in a complex (biological) system as their 'proof'. Why is it a problem of the scientific community? Well, I don't mean to 'blame' anyone, but there is a major problem in perception as to what science can and cannot do for some reason.... I'm sure the media who's survival depends on drama has focused and perpetuated it. But for some reason the scientific community is believed to be able to know & prove things that they actually CAN'T!! If people were aware of the situation, and using the lung cancer example as a guide, I believe that society would be willing to use more common sense and depend on "scientific proof" less! Yes LESS. IMHO anything that effects our natural systems should always be looked at assuming a great degree of uncertainty, rather than assuming there are answers in the next 'study'. So the scientific community brings ON THEMSELVES both knowingly and unknowingly, a lack of respect and trust by trying to show cause and effect where they have no business doing so. DAK

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next