Post #495145 by tiki mick on Sun, Nov 22, 2009 9:24 AM

The real difference between the scientific approach, and the approach of people who engage in partisanship is very simple: Scientist do not know the outcome of anything. They do their best to find out by testing, measuring, analyzing. If something happens which makes them alter their judgement, then they accept that.

A clear exampple is when you see scientists constructing a spaceship that is supposed to look for evidence of life on mars or somewhere else. They are wearing decontamination suits while doing this, because they don't want even the slightest chance that a microbe from here could somehow end up over there, screwing up the results. The scientific method uses logic, evidence and deduction to find out answers.

Contrast this to the non scientific method used by many people, especially on talk radio. They already have their answer, now they find out ways to justify their answer. This applies to the anti- evolution crowd and the anti-human-caused global warming crowd.

They already have their answer. They don't want evolution to be true because it would impact their version of religion. They don't want global warming to be human caused, because it impacts their love of factories and big business. Would not want to put ANY regulations on a business, right?

It's true, healthy skeptism on anything is a virtue, but these people go too far. When 9 out of 10 scientists are clearly stating that global warming is caused by humans, we should believe it. The other 10 percent (and I actually think it's more like 1%) are scientists where in the past it has been proven that some big business or political faction paid them good money to contradict what we all know to be true.

I believe what scientists say, because of the methodology of their research. it's the same research that built the computer I am typing on, that created the H1N1 vaccination, and the same science that will help track down someone who has killed a love one through DNA examination.

I can't understand, for the life of me, why people pick and choose what they are going to believe. They say that it is the scientist that has an agenda, but it is really the opposite. If a scientist has proven something, but then new information comes along which contradicts them, (after testing it using the scientific method), they alter their findings accordingly. Not so for the other segment of the population. They have their idea, and nothing under heavan or earth will change their minds! That's not scientific, it's just being stubborn.