3 ms·
Basically, they don't know squat. They had one crater and a theory. Then they found a 2nd crater and a new theory emerges. Presumably there's a 3rd crater somew
by tlb 17y ago
Basically, they don't know squat. They had one crater and a theory. Then they found a 2nd crater and a new theory emerges. Presumably there's a 3rd crater somewhere that'll require another theory. I think I'll ignore paleontology for another 20 years and see if the theories settle down.
- thaumaturgy 17y agoWell, that's what science is. First there's the observation. Then there's a guess. Then there are tests, and sometimes more guesses. Then more observations come along, and everything gets revised. This is in contrast to faith, where the individual picks the conclusion that they like, and then tries to fit the evidence to it.
- greendestiny 17y agoNot all scientific theories are equal. Some just manage to scrape by an explanation for the known facts without providing further testable predictions - while this isn't inherently bad, I place a lot more confidence in theories that explain facts that they weren't specifically invented to explain.
- philwelch 17y agoYes, but there are questions where we apparently know a lot, so our theories do not change very much, and then there are questions where we don't know shit, so our theories radically change with each new data point. We have much higher confidence in relativity (or in the limited-scope applicability of Newtonian physics) than, for instance, any given theory about the extinction of the dinosaurs.