Yes, this is one problem. Another is that there is no evidence for or against it, except that it makes the equations look good. Instead of thinking maybe there's a mistake in the equations, they think "let's create this theory to explain the discrepancy!"
I speak four, and we all blame my dad for this, even though our only overlapping language is English.
See, I've never gotten this distain for humanities. I'm pretty sure we wouldn't be doing any advanced science at all without the ability to communicate and understand one another.
This, so much. I think most of them, when learning the scientific method had the "this is the only way to learn concrete scientific facts" drummed into them so hard that they forgot that there were other kinds of facts and truth than the scientific sorts. We can't do an experiment to see if Napoleon lost at Waterloo, but we know it happened, and how do I prove that Mayim means water in Hebrew? Yet this is true. And I certainly know that if I desecrate a site that someone holds sacred, it will hurt them, even f there is no proof that it is sacred.
no subject
Date: 2011-09-09 04:29 pm (UTC)I speak four, and we all blame my dad for this, even though our only overlapping language is English.
See, I've never gotten this distain for humanities. I'm pretty sure we wouldn't be doing any advanced science at all without the ability to communicate and understand one another.
This, so much. I think most of them, when learning the scientific method had the "this is the only way to learn concrete scientific facts" drummed into them so hard that they forgot that there were other kinds of facts and truth than the scientific sorts. We can't do an experiment to see if Napoleon lost at Waterloo, but we know it happened, and how do I prove that Mayim means water in Hebrew? Yet this is true. And I certainly know that if I desecrate a site that someone holds sacred, it will hurt them, even f there is no proof that it is sacred.