Quote:
Originally Posted by rcglinsk
Second, I submit that science magazine, discovery etc., who have no way to write anything if they don't get it from this community, regularly speak with certainty about theories that you just right there claimed that no one was certain about or represented certainty about.
|
There is no such thing as absolute certainty in science. That isn't how science works. However, science magazines (popular or otherwise) don't bother mentioning that in every issue.
Quote:
|
I think also, that casual readers who don't work with astronomy in any regular way have no idea that there is not conclusive evidence behind these theories.
|
What theories? What level of evidence would you classify as "conclusive"?
Quote:
|
It's important that the lack of evidence for the theory be more accurately conveyed in public.
|
Again: Lack of evidence for what theory? It seems you've gone from a philosophical point about "certainty" to some argument that some theory lacks evidence.
Quote:
|
Y'all are out convincing people Iraq was behind 9/11, because no lay person has any idea that there is not laboratory or any other kind of verification for the big bang etc. theories.
|
First: Not a subject for discussion on this board. Second: That sentence doesn't make sense no matter how I read it.
Quote:
|
Also, if not for a fundamental certainty, what's with all the hatred of the electric universe theory?
|
Remember your question about evidence? The EU idea (not "theory" as it doesn't rise to the level of theory) is dismissed for lack of evidence.