View Single Post
Old 03-03-2014, 07:26 PM   #38
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Rochester, NY
Posts: 1,154
Originally Posted by Glen View Post

If I could figure out how to break quotes out I would, but it never works for me. I will let this be my last response on this matter. You stated I want you to argue for a position, I never suggested that. You posted that my example argument to Cityboy was terrible. It then went round and round for you to basically say you agree with the OP's position, but had to argue a bunch of points on how you got there and how there are no answers, only questions. Very existential but not practical, IMHO. I'm not interested in hijacking Vt's thread any further, so I'll let you have the last word.
I was merely pointing out that your argument wasn't viable in terms of the history of science. The majority has been wrong before, that is my only point. I don't know any other nice way to put it.

I agree that we shouldn't take risks with our environment, that is the only thing I agree on, although I think I'm the only one who eluded to that, so I guess I'm agreeing with myself. And I agree that science has always thrived on uncertainty, always will. Critics will always say scientists don't know jack because they have different views, but by evolving these views are discussed and put the test, and eventually we weed out the crud and come with something useful, but that by no means confirms absolute truth. All science is subject to revision when new findings are brought to the table (usually trying to answer one of those many questions that were generated when searching for the answer). That is the beauty of it. It always gets better.
l'oiseau is offline