Is there a method?

Discussion in 'General Science & Technology' started by Juanchogespacho, Jan 11, 2014.

  1. leopold Valued Senior Member

  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  3. dumbest man on earth Real Eyes Realize Real Lies Valued Senior Member

    Trippy, when paddoboy posted his Post #2 (20 minutes after the OP) and Post #3 (2 minutes after that - and fully 22 minutes after the OP), I posted in my Post #4 :
    After Posting my Post #4, I did fully read paddoboy's Post #3, and the Linked page. I saw no reason, at that time to respond to it because most of it was covered in the Links that I Posted in the OP.

    When paddoboy posted his Post #5 :
    I then Posted #6 :
    So yes, Trippy, I read and fully considered what paddoboy Posted in his Post #3. After giving it it's due consideration, I asked paddoboy to explain it's relevance to the OP.

    You should note though, Trippy, that paddoboy has recently stated in his Post #54 :
    So, Trippy, I did read and (concluding as padddoboy has since stated : "supports fully" his "view of the scientific method", I addressed it in my Post #6, by asking : "In what way is the ^^above quoted^^ relevant to the OP?[/QUOTE]

    When you ask that I Read, Consider and Address any Posts - I assure you that I do just that, Prior to Posting any response to said Posts.

    It would seem however that you would prefer to defend someone who, by his own stated and Posted admission, does not do any of that, Prior to Posting his Posts.
    Last edited: Jan 23, 2014
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  5. paddoboy Valued Senior Member


    Spot on, and may I say, it will never go obsolete. If it did, we would be in real trouble and would need to bend over and kiss our arse goodbye!

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  7. dumbest man on earth Real Eyes Realize Real Lies Valued Senior Member

    Trippy, evidently there were some servers down somewhere and I was not able access SciForums for a span of time earlier today.
    At any rate, as I explained in an earlier Posting, I did not ignore any Posts. I am not sure what "got nasy over it" means, nor how it would be "dangerously close to trolling".

    Trippy , I have no idea how, by simply Posting the OP, and then paddoboy Posting in his Post #2:
    I took the "high road" at that time and ignored his slight. after his first few Posts, wherein he was repeating himself (more or less), I then simply asked him, in my Post #6 :

    I did try to ignore the "personal insults", and I do try to "engage in on topic discussion".

    Heck, Trippy, I asked you about starting this Thread - Prior to Posting the OP.

    Look , Posting on this Forum is not a big part of my life, when I am not in the hospital, I rarely even read Sciforums, let alone Post.

    If any "tempers fray" or any "conversations get heated", it is not my temper that is getting frayed, nor am I the one to instigate or heat up the conversation with blatant name-calling and poor Netiquette.

    If my conduct on this Forum actually warrants Moderator Action, is not for me to decide, and as you have shown previously, there is nothing that I can do about said Moderator Action - whether warranted or not.

    I will take your recommendations under full consideration.

    Thank you, and sorry to take up your time.
  8. dumbest man on earth Real Eyes Realize Real Lies Valued Senior Member

    From the first Link :

    If you read the page(s) at that Link, there is a Link to the "interactive flowchart" :

    It seems to be explained quite well on those pages the various methods involved in the various sciences.

    BTW, who said that the application and use of Scientific Methods was or should be obsolete?
  9. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    A couple of quotes illustrating beautifully the scientific method in progress.....

    “Scientists are human—they're as biased as any other group. But they do have one great advantage in that science is a self-correcting process.”
    ― Cyril Ponnamperuma

    “Nevertheless, scientific method is not the same as the scientific spirit. The scientific spirit does not rest content with applying that which is already known, but is a restless spirit, ever pressing forward towards the regions of the unknown, and endeavouring to lay under contribution for the special purpose in hand the knowledge acquired in all portions of the wide field of exact science. Lastly, it acts as a check, as well as a stimulus, sifting the value of the evidence, and rejecting that which is worthless, and restraining too eager flights of the imagination and too hasty conclusions.”
    ― Archibald E. Garrod
  10. Trippy ALEA IACTA EST Staff Member

    I may address things further when I get home from work and can post from my desktop rather than my phone. I'm not really inviting debate, however, I want to take the time to address something.

    Is what I mean about taking your blinkers off.

    From whence the assumption he was referring to you as a pseudoscientific crackpot?

    Homeopathy is pseudoquackery.
    Antivax is pseudoquackery.
    the beauty industry relies on pseudoquackery for advertising.
    The scientific method allows us to weed out those who would use pseudoquackery to muddy the waters and convince us that the claims of homeopaths, antivaxers, and L'oreal have some kind of basis in reality regardless of whether they're doing it deliberately or not.

    it's also perhaps the biggest problem in climate sciemce discussions, is people making claims that seem superficially to be based in science but are im reality based in mud.
  11. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Most will agree that The greatest advantage of the scientific method is that it is unprejudiced, and in being so, it sorts out the truth from lies and delusion.
  12. leopold Valued Senior Member

    yes they do.
    purification by distillation is also a method.
    so is getting a waveform from an oscilloscope.
    getting the letter "A" from a CPU also requires a method.
    adjusting the front wheels on your car also needs a method.
    getting an artifact out of rock needs a method.
    ALL of the above are methods used in the various sciences.
    frankly i don't see your point.
    you say there is more than one "scientific method" but you haven't stated precisely what it is.
    on the other hand more than one poster has given you what the "scientific method" is AND have stated what it is.

    no one said the method was obsolete.
    i'm with paddoboy on this one, it will never go obsolete simply because it's an outgrowth of the way we as humans think.
    as long as humanity is inquisitive the method will be in vogue.
  13. Ruiy Registered Member

    Assuming everything mentioned until now in relation to the method of science: his logic, his prescribed rules, his checks and verifications, the empirical fact, preliminary hypothesis and his consequent theories, the formulation of a law, there is a fact that, I think, has not been mentioned yet and is there omnipresent throughout all phases that make up this method and goes hand in hand with the discovery: the absolutely fortuitous surrounding at all times this process, the chance, the luck, the immediate social context, the trial / error, the method outgoing. What I like to call "the illogical of scientific method and discovery".
  14. dumbest man on earth Real Eyes Realize Real Lies Valued Senior Member

    leopold, the following is from the OP :
    I made no other statements, the details are in the Links Posted.

    Actually in your ^^above quoted^^ Post you mentioned a few different "methods" didn't you?

    Are the "methods" that a Theoretical Physicist utilizes on a daily basis the exact same "methods" that a Biologist or an Archaeologist would use?

    Sorry if I have caused you any confusion.

    I myself, stand by Science and have employed many different "methods" in various Sciences over the past near 40 years. I neither want to see nor would care to see any of the true sciences abolished or go obsolete. The advancement of science is one of the great aspects of human civilization.

    Again, sorry to have caused you any confusion.
  15. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    That's exactly what I have been saying since the start of this.
  16. leopold Valued Senior Member

    no worries.
    the saddest thing i can think of in regards to science is that a significant number of discoveries has been by accident.
  17. dumbest man on earth Real Eyes Realize Real Lies Valued Senior Member


    So you don't know any scientists who have lost their funding/jobs/income simply because their research did not produce the results that were demanded by those providing the funding?

    To me that is sad.
  18. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    The scientific method is as much about any perceived failure as it is about success.
    Any results, good or bad can be built upon.
    Serendipity is of course as much about the scientific method as is the hard yakka.
    As mentioned previously, if we didn't have it, as the foundation stone, we would have kissed our arse goodbye long ago.
  19. leopold Valued Senior Member

    like they say, "it ain't over until the fat lady sings".
    science has brought us some really fantastic technology, biotechnology can ruin us if we aren't vigilant.
    the perfected mind/ machine interface will completely change our society.
    we already have the technology to "think things into existence" on a rudimentary scale.
    light speed might be closer than we know.
  20. paddoboy Valued Senior Member


    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    I'm pretty optimistic and Imaginative leopold, and am of the opnion, given time, that which is allowed by the laws of physics, can eventually happen...If we are able to warp, curve space/time ala Star Trek, we could certainly achieve a perception of travelling at or faster then light.
    We just need the time.
  21. Russ_Watters Not a Trump supporter... Valued Senior Member

    I don't think that's true. Can you name more than one from the past 100 years?
  22. leopold Valued Senior Member

    the above was taken from the following search results: Search&oq=&aq=&aqi=&aql=&gs_l=

    one very important "discovery by accident" was the transistor.
    bardeen and others were looking for a solid state replacement for the vacuum tube, the FET.
    what they discovered was the bipolar transistor instead.
    the FET was discovered, or invented, some years later.
  23. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Serendipity is part of science and the scientific method.

Share This Page