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.

Biotech / Medical : Coronavirus / COVID-19 Pandemic -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Graystone who wrote (2903)	5/18/2020 12:07:41 PM
From: TimF	1 Recommendation Recommended By Stock Puppy Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 22868

Do you even read my posts before you respond to them? As for what's correct, I'm agreeing that wearing masks is a good thing. I'm just saying that it not absolutely certain, and its unreasonable to ban people for having a different opinion. No examinations or data need to be studied, hypothesis - experiment is all. No it isn't. Whole fields of science are mostly observational with experimentation very difficult to impossible for many questions in the field. Where experiment is possible, you need to examine data to develop the hypothesis, then examine and analyze data to determine what the results of the experiment mean. Beyond that the experimental results aren't as solid in this area as you seem to think. Esp. experiments specific to COVID-19 since its so new. The idea (a quite reasonable one in my opinion) that people should try to wear masks when they are out in public to help reduce the spread of the disease is not a matter of solid experimental result on this disease. Its from limited experimentation with some conflicting results and no time yet for followup on this disease, some more experiments with other diseases in the past, and a lot of examining and thinking about data and coming to the best conclusion based on somewhat limited data. Toss out the that analysis and you have almost nothing. And yes, until another experiment proves the hypothesis is incorrect, it is the current theory, the truth.Not dogma, the truth, proven by experiment. Presenting it as "the truth" is presenting it as dogma. Esp, in cases where there have been limited time for experimentation and analysis, but even in the most solid and long standing cases where the understanding is much firmer. Science is always out best understanding at the moment subject to revision later as more data becomes available and understanding improves. Its always subject to challenge and always should be. If it no longer is it will then just be dogma and no longer science even if the original understanding was developed through experimentation and the scientific method.