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.

Pastimes : The New Qualcomm - write what you like thread. -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: A.J. Mullen who wrote (7418)	3/7/2006 5:28:31 PM
From: Maurice Winn	Respond to of 12247

Ashley, maybe the prof wants to take over from the priests [who make up anything they like], and the scientists [who believe in an objective reality]. He wants logic to be the arbiter of reality. "If something can be reasoned into existence, then it's so". Which isn't far from the mathematical shenanigans of the string theorists with their inflationary Bigger Bangs. That would avoid the need for the icky practicality of testing the proposition. As you pointed out, his logic is faulty. "Some "scientists" are bandits, therefore science is bung". Actually, I have some sympathy with him as most "science" seems to me to be full of holes, with confusion of correlation with causation being the most popular mistake. Though that's probably more to do with the dopey journalists who interpret the science results to a pithy slogan, concluding something which the scientists didn't claim. There is too much statistics in science and not enough mechanism. Of course statistics are useful to find things to study to determine mechanisms, but the studies seem to stop at the statistics. For example; eggs have cholesterol, people with high cholesterol are statistically those with heart disease, therefore don't eat eggs. I don't recall ever reading a mechanism which would mean cholesterol would cause artery blockage. Mqurice