3 ms·
Katz's attempts to delegitimize Loeb as a scientist makes his argument less credible. Aliens or not, it's disingenuous to deny that some aspects of Oumuamua d
by Jimmc414 4y ago
Katz's attempts to delegitimize Loeb as a scientist makes his argument less credible. Aliens or not, it's disingenuous to deny that some aspects of Oumuamua don't yet have satisfactory explanation.
- echelon 4y agoScientists are people subject to the same foibles as the rest of us.
- 0xdeadbeefbabe 4y agoBut, the abstract promises a direct challenge: > one of them is Jonathan I. Katz who challenges Loeb’s hypothesis directly
- ProAm 4y agoIt's a passive aggressive funding fight. Just politics and business. I'm pretty sure Loeb isn't as crazy as his latest claims make it seem, but without outlandish bold claims no one will fund future observation and scientific work on it. At least that's been my take on Loeb's behavior.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- jerf 4y ago"Doesn't yet have a satisfactory explanation -> Must be aliens" has a long history, long enough that the rest of us are entitled to draw the inductive conclusion that it's a weak argument very unlikely to be true. It is inductive, not deductive, so this bothers people laboring under the misapprehension that science deals with deductive reasoning. But science is ultimately inductive; we happen to sometimes get to deduce things within its framework but it all lives in an inductive framework.
- Finnucane 4y agoThat's just one step down from "Doesn't yet have a satisfactory explanation -> Must be supernatural.'