4 ms·
That's diverging from what was being discussed and creating a strawman that you are now debunking. The context is the use of method-less science that uses assu
by IncRnd 8y ago
That's diverging from what was being discussed and creating a strawman that you are now debunking. The context is the use of method-less science that uses assumptions based upon indicators as working hypothesis - not that there are always base assumptions but that the refutation of testing while holding assumptions up as tested is something that is bad science.
- vertexFarm 8y agoI thought what was being discussed was: "The real sciense[sic] should contain ONLY the things which are proved with real proofs!" As in mathematical proofs. You can't prove most things the way you can in mathematics, which is rock-solid through tautologies and self-consistent abstract models. When you are observing actual reality you have to make some assumptions.
- IncRnd 8y agoWhat was being discussed was the reply in the context of my comment that had been replied to. I was not the original GP poster. Sorry, if I didn't make that clear.