 |
|
You are not logged in! F.A.Q Log in Register |
 |
|
 |
 Now online (2)dariusgriffin big ...and 415 guests Last 5 registered Oplandisks nothingstar N_loop yipe foxtrotromeo Browse members... |
 |
Members 8025Messages 2614104 Today 1 Topics 127542 |
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
i know |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
that was my contribution to this, wank thread :) |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
thanks := |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
buimp |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Well, I certainly cannot defend the whole scientific community, I wouldn't know. But there is no such thing as perfect information, no matter how advanced our measurements are there is always uncertainty, accuracy and precision are very important and somewhat elusive, that's basic physics. Anomalies are expected to arise, the idea is that if we repeat processes we will find trends that could be described using a relatively simple mathematical description. When we have that, practical uses come afterward. Keep in mind though, there are people that are called scientists that are generally not widely accepted by the scientific community. Particularly people who don't use double blind procedures. I guess I do wonder though, why it is that we assume the underlying nature of everything to be somewhat simple. Mappatazee, I think "ordo inveniendi" translates to something like "Entering the order". Order in the sense of a religious order, so it can also mean their rules. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
|
Messageboard index
|
|||||||||
