Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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.

Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: The Philosopher who wrote (17973)	7/11/2001 1:57:31 PM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

I once believed that this could be overcome,and that it was possible for people to give a truly neutral, unbiased view of a situation. No more. People can get pretty close when they have the intelligence, training and particularly the temperament for it, and especially so with peer review. I've seen way too much success with that to dismiss it. Not that everyone can do it. Or even that the majority can do it. But people can. Unfortunately our society is valuing that ability less and less as we reward the loudly opinionated shouting heads. Karen P.S. Did you notice the article on twins on the dream link that Thames provided? You might find it interesting.

To: The Philosopher who wrote (17973)	7/11/2001 7:21:24 PM
From: thames_sider	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

I know about the psych classes... hence the emphasis on reproducibility. That's the point of the scientific method: if you aren't sure, or if there's room for different interpretations, show it again and again, and do it under controlled conditions. And it's very hard to fool a camera, or a computer. I agree, witnesses differ - on something they've seen once, probably unexpectedly, without reason to memorise: but a camera recording doesn't. And if the same experiment gives the same results, I'd count that as fact. This weakens the 'single witness' case (e.g., individual biblical revelations), not science... Plus, it's hard to describe a fossil dinosaur bone in too many ways. It's still harder to come to too many different interpretations that fit each and every bone... and the fossil is still there to examine, if you disagree... As for scientific experiments: do it right, and the expected, scientifically predicted outcomes honestly do emerge. Whether or not you 'believe' in wave-particle duality, you can get a diffraction pattern from a light source passed through two slits. Or do you believe that every observer of this simple experiment is misreporting? No need for miracles. But, as I say, reproduce one and I'll be fascinated.