Since evidently I'm an idiot, someone explain what "real" science is to me

You see, some people here insist that because I think that documented facts, evidence, and so on is real science, I am some kind of deluded idiot. They seem to think that "traditional knowledge" counts.

So, someone who is far more intelligent than I am, please explain to this engineering student getting his master's what "science" is. Apparently I really need to know, as I only have a year left on this degree to get it right!

arguing with the astrologers again? :-) As my avatar will attest, I sympathize with you.

who called you a deluded idiot....come to think of it, I'm not even sure what 'traditional knowledge' is!....but science is indeed documented facts and evidence.

I can give you Karl Popper's version:
If there is no possible evidence that can DISprove your theorem, than it cannot be proven either.

Science (to me) has always been the hypothosis/test method: you come up with a idea, you think of ways to test it, you test it until it fails or you run out of tests. If you can't test it, it's not science. So many things out there right now are not tested, or worse, the tests are done in a way that bias can creep in.

There's much more to it than that, of course.

outside of that you're real smart!!!!

My bad! :)

using the scientific method, to wit

1. observe, for example i have noticed the sun 'rises' every day
2. frame a hypothesis based on observation; the sun rises every day
3. i observe that the sun keeps rising every day so i theorize that the sun will always rise every day.
4. i have deduced, based on observation the theory that the sun rises every day. the theory predicts that the sun will rise tomorrow
5. i see no deviations from the theory, so the longer that no contradictions are found, the stronger the theory
6. this is not a perfect theory. the whole theory can be refuted if the sun does not rise. this is its testability

so in general science is the study of the physical world using observation, developing theories based on veriafiable observation, testing the theories to determine if predicted events occur. ie 100% materialism.

then one day another theory comes on down the pike and upon critical examination and testing and is a better predicter of reality than the old theory. the new theory superceeds the old.

scientific theories are always changable and can be improved upon, or even disproved. the scientific view of the material world is not fixed.

Whatever Dr Science says it is. So just you be a good little simpleton and listen to Dr Science because he knows more than you do. http://www.ducksbreath.com/ :evilgrin:

Oh, my bad. That's WEIRD Science! :-)

... not that I'm calling anyone here freepers.

But people on both sides (liberals and conservatives) tend to deny science when it debunks something they hold dear.

I had a brief discussion with someone here on the harmful effects of marijuana. As soon as this person claimed no scientific evidence exists that even implies pot is harmful, I just bowed out of the conversation.

Science is NOT a list of what we know to be true.

Science is instead a list of things we know are NOT true, a few things we suspect MIGHT be true (theories), and a community of people doing their absolute best to disprove each and every existing theory. Some of those theories have been so rigorously tested (many people tried to disprove them, but failed) that we're mighty sure they are facts. But we're never 100% sure.

To some that un-surety is a weakness. To me it's sciences strength. Science is continuously examining itself, weeding out weaknesses, finding new pathways, rebuilding itself when old foundations prove false. Science devours itself, it's appetite is voracious, and conversely when it's done feeding it is stronger than ever.

Science is capable of absorbing brand new concepts and completely reinventing our world view. Think I'm exaggerating? Consider the pre and post atomic worlds. One day we live in a universe of solid bodies made of "stuff." Iron stuff, glass stuff, rubber stuff, wood stuff, etc...

Next day we live in a universe in which everything is composed of different combinations of a few basic particles (Protons, Neutrons, Electrons) arranged in different ways and different numbers, and packed so loosely that they are mostly empty space. Objects are no longer solids. Without atomic bondings there'd be nothing stopping one object from passing right through another. We live in a world of shadowy illusion made real only through our perceptions.

Science isn't facts and figures. It's ideas. Many ideas we know are wrong, some that seem to be right, and an exciting few that have only occured to a limited few of us.

That's what science is to me.

in the Phyisiology lab we spent many hours, nay, days perhaps even weeks fine tunining everything.

Every now and then we would do some research, record data etc,etc.

We called that "Real Science."

180

n/t

I won't offer one, since I'm not a scientist, and I'm sure I'm not more intelligent than anyone. I do wonder what set you off, though!

I see a huge problem with science in our current system. Humans manipulate and corrupt. The scientific process has been manipulated and corrupted for material/political gain so often that us folks in the general non-scientific community no longer trust it.

When we hear, "studies show," we know that studies were manipulated to produce the desired results. Bad science. You can probably think of plenty of examples.

I know this isn't what you meant, but it is one reason why you might run into an attitude like that.

but it usually shows up when an independent group tries to reproduce the results. in the long run cheats get caught because other people need to be able to independently reproduce your results. it may take longer than you like though.