WHAT DOES IT MEAN TO FOLLOW
THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD? PT 1.
As the Controversy Continues over GLOBAL WARMING, THE POLITICS OF THE SUBJECT ARE PUSHING ASIDE WHAT REALLY COUNTS, LEAVING US WITH THE FOLLOWING;
ARE CONCLUSIONS BASED UPON THE PRINCIPLES OF THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD, LOGIC, AND CRITICAL THINKING COMING UNDER ATTACK BY THOSE PUSHING A POLITICAL AGENDA THAT IS ENTIRELY SELF- SERVING, AND CARES NOTHING ABOUT THE REALITY OF THE SITUATION?
This Article is not going to Address the GLOBAL WARMING Controversy Itself, but will look at THE PROCESSES BEING USED TO ARRIVE AT THE DIFFERENT CONCLUSIONS BEING OFFERED TO BEST EXPLAIN THE EVIDENCE RELEVANT TO THE SUBJECT MATTER. IN OTHER WORDS, WHAT IS THE BEST WAY TO FIND THE TRUTH ABOUT ANY NATURAL PHENOMENA, AND WHAT WILL LEAD US TO REAL ANSWERS INSTEAD OF BOGUS ASSERTIONS.
First, a Few Guidelines.
- If one side spends most of its Time and Energy Attempting to Poke Holes in the Oppositions Theories, Evidence, and Conclusions, and Little on its Own Arguments that Support Their Position, IT MAY BE BECAUSE THEY HAVE LITTLE TO OFFER.
- Arguing Motivations is a Meaningless Waste of Time. The SCIENTIFIC METHOD IS NOT A VALUE BASED WAY OF LOOKING AT THE NATURAL WORLD. LIKE THE RULES OF LOGIC AND CRITICAL THINKING, THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD ACTS INDEPENDENTLY OF THE REASONS BEHIND THE SEARCH FOR ANSWERS.
- What is the Source of the Evidence, Testimony, and Opinions being offered? For Example, Are they Taken From Peer Reviewed Material that has been Heavily Examined and Scrutinized for any Procedural Mistakes?
FINALLY, WHAT TYPE OF EVIDENCE WOULD EITHER SIDE CONSIDER IMPORTANT AND CRUCIAL ENOUGH THAT IT WOULD CHANGE THEIR POSITION ON THE SUBJECT?
END PART 1.
FEATURE ARTICLES.
WHAT DOES IT MEAN TO FOLLOW
THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD? PT 2.
When you Discuss any Type of Theory to explain an Action, Event, or Phenomena, be it a single example or a series, the SCIENTIFIC METHOD demands the Following;
- DEFINE THE PARAMETERS OF WHAT YOU ARE SEEKING TO ESTABLISH.
- WHAT METHODS DO YOU PLAN ON USING TO ESTABLISH RESULTS THAT CAN BE PROPERLY STUDIED, EVALUATED, OR REPLICATED IN A LABORATORY SETTING.
- HOW WAS ANY DATA OR INFORMATION TO BE USED OBTAINED? WHAT ARE THE SOURCES, AND WHAT WERE THE CIRCUMSTANCES SURROUNDING THE GATHERING OF SUCH MATERIAL? WHAT ARE THE POSSIBILITIES OF CONTAMINATION THAT WOULD ALTER THE QUALITY OF USEFUL EVIDENCE?
- IS CERTAIN EVIDENCE, THAT BY ITS NATURE IS OF LOW QUALITY, GIVEN TO MUCH INFLUENCE IN ESTABLISHING THE TRUTH OR VALIDITY OF ANY CONCLUSIONS BEING MADE. (This could include things like ANECDOTAL OR PICTORIAL TESTIMONY. EVIDENCE LIKE THIS IS OFTEN VERY SUBJECTIVE IN NATURE, AND MAY RELY ON THE PERCEPTIONS OF THE OBSERVER OR WITNESS, WHICH COULD BE IMPOSSIBLE TO EVALUATE OR STUDY IN ANY MEANINGFUL WAY.)
- ARE THERE ANY ASSUMPTIONS OR ASSERTIONS BEING MADE ABOUT DATA BEING USED, THAT HAVE NOT BEEN ESTABLISHED AS TRUE? DO ANY CONCLUSIONS BEING MADE RELY ON MATERIAL THAT ITSELF IS OF DUBIOUS AND UNSUBSTANTIATED QUALITY?
- ARE THE CONCLUSIONS MADE AT THE END THE BEST AND MOST PROBABLE WAY OF EXPLAINING THE EVIDENCE? ARE THERE OTHER, MORE REASONABLE WAYS TO EXPLAIN WHAT HAS BEEN FOUND?
In Part 3, we will look at how these GUIDELINES WERE USED IN THE PAST.
FEATURE ARTICLES.
WHAT DOES IT MEAN TO FOLLOW
THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD? PT 3.
One of the Greatest Misconceptions about the SCIENTIFIC METHOD, and its History, is that many people believe it has been around for Centuries.
This Erroneous Belief is Commonly Used by Proponents of Bogus Science to Promote Their Ideas, Assumptions, and Conclusions. It is claimed that the Rejection of Their Work, by the Scientific Community and Government Agencies, is Similar to some of the Laws and Mechanisms of Science that we take for granted Today, being Suppressed in the
past.
This is not only Untrue in a historical sense, but it also takes the form of an INVALID ARGUMENT.
- IN THE PAST, SOME OF THE RULES OF SCIENCE AND THE NATURAL UNIVERSE WE TAKE FOR GRANTED AS BEING TRUE TODAY, WERE PROHIBITED FROM BEING TAUGHT AND DISCUSSED BY THOSE IN A POSITION OF POWER.
- THROUGH EDUCATION, THE RULES OF LOGIC, AND PROPER METHODOLOGY WE NOW KNOW THE SUPPRESSION OF THESE IDEAS WAS NOT BASED ON PROPER SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH.
- THEREFORE, THE REJECTION IN TODAYS WORLD OF CERTAIN IDEAS AND THEORIES IS JUST THE LATEST EXAMPLE OF THE POWERS THAT BE SUPPRESSING SCIENTIFIC TRUTHS THAT DO NOT FIT THEIR VIEW OF THE UNIVERSE.
HOWEVER,
- EVEN IF IT WAS COMPLETELY TRUE THAT SCIENTIFIC TRUTHS AND NATURAL LAWS WERE SUPPRESSED IN THE PAST, FOR CONTRADICTING ESTABLISHED BELIEFS THAT WERE HELD BY POWERFUL INDIVIDUALS AND GROUPS, IT DOES NOT NECESSARILY MEAN THAT THOSE REJECTED TODAY ARE THE RESULTS OF THE SAME TYPE OF IRRATIONAL AND SELF- CENTERED MINDSET.
THE MAIN REASON- THE REJECTION OF SCIENTIFIC TRUTHS AND LAWS THAT WERE PUT IN PLACE IN THE PAST, WAS NOT THE RESULT OF THE MISUSE OF THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD, BUT OF FACTORS THAT HAD LITTLE TO DO WITH PROPER ANALYSIS, CRITICAL THINKING AND OBEYING THE RULES OF LOGIC.
