paul's got wright Posted May 1, 2018 Share Posted May 1, 2018 here's an excerpt from the convention, posted by the dailymail. quick quick shut them down!!!!!! sorry its too funny that the b'stard really thinks that's how to tackle the "fe" question! http://www.dailymail.co.uk/video/news/video-1679914/Excerpt-Dave-Marsh-disproving-planetary-motion.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manxman1980 Posted May 1, 2018 Share Posted May 1, 2018 PGW please can you clarify what "scientific method" would provide sufficient proof for you? I have put quotation marks simply because I am quoting you directly. To me a scientific method is generating a hypothesis and then testing that through experimentation which provide measurable results. Those results will either support the original hypothesis or not. The experiment should be performed in a controlled way, with any variables noted, and with any equipment properly calibrated. The experiment should be repeatable and all the data collected should be reviewed and considered. Another person should be able to follow the same methodology and under the same conditions come up with the same results. Chinahand has given you examples of many experiments which can be used to test the hypothesis that the world is a globe. Chinahand has even explained how you, or anyone else, can undertake the same experiments and compare the results against previous experiments. I have seen no-one satisfactorily present a scientific method which provides data to support the hypothesis that the world is anything other than a globe. My final point on this topic is that we can clearly see through telescopes the shape of the other planets in the solar system. Everyone one of them is an imperfect globe. Why would the Earth be a different shape from the other planets? What would make the Earth so special? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul's got wright Posted May 1, 2018 Share Posted May 1, 2018 2 hours ago, manxman1980 said: PGW please can you clarify what "scientific method" would provide sufficient proof for you? I have put quotation marks simply because I am quoting you directly. To me a scientific method is generating a hypothesis and then testing that through experimentation which provide measurable results. Those results will either support the original hypothesis or not. The experiment should be performed in a controlled way, with any variables noted, and with any equipment properly calibrated. The experiment should be repeatable and all the data collected should be reviewed and considered. Another person should be able to follow the same methodology and under the same conditions come up with the same results. Chinahand has given you examples of many experiments which can be used to test the hypothesis that the world is a globe. Chinahand has even explained how you, or anyone else, can undertake the same experiments and compare the results against previous experiments. I have seen no-one satisfactorily present a scientific method which provides data to support the hypothesis that the world is anything other than a globe. My final point on this topic is that we can clearly see through telescopes the shape of the other planets in the solar system. Everyone one of them is an imperfect globe. Why would the Earth be a different shape from the other planets? What would make the Earth s Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul's got wright Posted May 1, 2018 Share Posted May 1, 2018 good post mm. "To me a scientific method is generating a hypothesis and then testing that through experimentation which provide measurable results. Those results will either support the original hypothesis or not. The experiment should be performed in a controlled way, with any variables noted, and with any equipment properly calibrated. The experiment should be repeatable and all the data collected should be reviewed and considered. " this is fine by me, but to add to it, an hypothesis must contain at least two variables. an independent and a dependent variable. this is the "if" "then", or cause and effect relationship. "Chinahand has given you examples of many experiments which can be used to test the hypothesis that the world is a globe" here's where i disagree. the statement "the world is a globe" does not qualify as a scientific hypothesis. it's not an if then question, nor a cause and effect prediction/question. in order to make a scientific hypothesis you need to make a prediction using these factors, which can then be tested in the experiment. i'm well aware of the evidence that has been put forward in this thread and in the whole "fe" subject over the last few years. none has been sufficient to give me faith, in that which i do not know for myself about our earth. " we can clearly see through telescopes the shape of the other planets in the solar system. Everyone of them is an imperfect globe" again i'd disagree, not with the observation part, but simply because they are not tangible objects nor are they observable from all perspectives. i'm not saying you're wrong about the shape of the "planets", but it's not enough to make one believe, in my opinion. you would need to be able to verify it scientifically. even if they all are, you would still need scientific proof, that the earth is a globe. assumption is the antithesis of a scientific test lets go through chinahand's recent post, later on tonight, and see if the experiments offered stand up to scientific scrutiny. anyone can make an objection at any point of the process and we can work through each one together. then bobbie can stop gettin wet knickers with all the excitement and having to be patient! x Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul's got wright Posted May 1, 2018 Share Posted May 1, 2018 China are you satisfied with the defintion or would it be best to use a citation, that can be agreed upon? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chinahand Posted May 1, 2018 Share Posted May 1, 2018 What science is is more complicated than the definitions given - a botanist classifying mugwort varieties is doing science. As Rutherford admitted stamp collecting as well as physics can be science. A large element of science is about prediction and that can just involve correlation and not causation so it can be unclear which variable is dependent and which is independent. Falsification is a biggy, if you continue accepting results when your model has shown to fail that makes it hard for you to say you are doing science - but again all models are wrong, with only some being useful - your model will be wrong - within a certain error band, the question is whether the error band is narrow enough to be useful. But this just gets into ever more nuanced and caveated arguments. Crack on PGW, what have you got to say?* *Did Orwell write your not really "anonymous" quote? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul's got wright Posted May 1, 2018 Share Posted May 1, 2018 Yes we know there are varying branches of science, and scientific enquiry and records. When we ask, what is the true shape, and full size of the earth, we are asking about natural world. So natural sciences apply To what standard are we to hold the evidence you have offered, other than the basic scientific method previously suggested. Im happy to use citation or accept what we have already, but we have to agree beforehand. Its whatever you think is most suitable china? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul's got wright Posted May 1, 2018 Share Posted May 1, 2018 What i mean is we need to agree on the necessary steps, and go from there Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chinahand Posted May 1, 2018 Share Posted May 1, 2018 Well ... play on. What have you got to say? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul's got wright Posted May 1, 2018 Share Posted May 1, 2018 Nothing until we can agree upon the paramiters ? See you tomorrow. Night china x Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul's got wright Posted May 1, 2018 Share Posted May 1, 2018 Nothing until we can agree upon the parameters ? See you tomorrow. Night china x Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chinahand Posted May 2, 2018 Share Posted May 2, 2018 You’re playing games. If you’ve something to say say it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul's got wright Posted May 2, 2018 Share Posted May 2, 2018 Now now china no need to be rude im being fair Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul's got wright Posted May 2, 2018 Share Posted May 2, 2018 It seems that we have come to a scientific empasse, just at the crucial moment of scrutiny. I would like to see what mm thinks? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Sausages Posted May 2, 2018 Share Posted May 2, 2018 Hey Paul, have you ever noticed that birds are just like fish that live in the sky? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.