Guest HucksterFoot Posted March 1, 2012 Share Posted March 1, 2012 ^I see your one and raise you one Science is facts; just as houses are made of stone, so is science made of facts; but a pile of stones is not a house, and a collection of facts is not necessarily science. Jules Henri Poincaré (1854-1912) French mathematician. Science is the great antidote to the poison of enthusiasm and superstition. Adam Smith (1723-90) Scottish economist. The Wealth of Nations, 1776. "But when you say it's a theory, not a fact; it makes it sound like theories and facts are opposite things; as if we are really sure of facts and we're not so sure of theories. In fact, theory in science is a higher level of understanding than facts, because what theories do, is they explain facts, they unite them." - Ken Miller Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest tracker Posted March 1, 2012 Share Posted March 1, 2012 MSNBC http://www.google.co...OnfekFNnIxuuVXg Hey Chris, Anything on ETT since our last chat? tracker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 1, 2012 Share Posted March 1, 2012 What's ETT? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDL Posted March 1, 2012 Share Posted March 1, 2012 ExtraTerrestrial Tattoos Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 1, 2012 Share Posted March 1, 2012 Head's up Dr. Ketchum is now taking questions for the upcoming website on her facebook page.....anyone with questions is being encouraged to ask them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Transformer Posted March 1, 2012 Share Posted March 1, 2012 "But when you say it's a theory, not a fact; it makes it sound like theories and facts are opposite things; as if we are really sure of facts and we're not so sure of theories. In fact, theory in science is a higher level of understanding than facts, because what theories do, is they explain facts, they unite them." - Ken Miller EXACTLY!!!!!!!!! There is NO Theory of Sasquatch all you have are Hypothesis!!!!! Thank you!!!! The defining characteristic of a scientific theory is that it makes falsifiable or testable predictions. The relevance and specificity of those predictions determine how potentially useful the theory is. A would-be theory that makes no predictions that can be observed is not a useful theory. Predictions not sufficiently specific to be tested are similarly not useful. In both cases, the term "theory" is hardly applicable. In practice a body of descriptions of knowledge is usually only called a theory once it has a minimum empirical basis, according to certain criteria: It is consistent with pre-existing theory, to the extent the pre-existing theory was experimentally verified, though it will often show pre-existing theory to be wrong in an exact sense. It is supported by many strands of evidence, rather than a single foundation, ensuring it is probably a good approximation, if not totally correct. [edit] Non-essential criteria Additionally, a theory is generally only taken seriously if: It is tentative, correctable, and dynamic in allowing for changes as new facts are discovered, rather than asserting certainty. It is among the most parsimonious explanations, sparing in proposed entities or explanations—commonly referred to as passing the Occam's razor test. (Since there is no generally accepted objective definition of parsimony, this is not a strict criteria, but some theories are much less economical than others.)https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_theory Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Bipedal Ape Posted March 1, 2012 Share Posted March 1, 2012 Head's up Dr. Ketchum is now taking questions for the upcoming website on her facebook page.....anyone with questions is being encouraged to ask them. Aslong as its not "when is the paper out" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 2, 2012 Share Posted March 2, 2012 (edited) Transformer In my opinion your wrong. There are many theories on BF, people PREDICT the habitat, behaviour and lifestyle of this creature all the time. Researchers go out into the field to TEST those predictions all the time. Wouldn't those facts alone, according to your definition of the word theory, prove your opening statement wrong? If you want to butt heads on the subject i'd be happy to oblige. Definition of Hypothesis- A hypothesis is a proposed explanation for a phenomenon. The term derives from the Greek word-hypotithenai-meaning "to put under" or "to suppose". Many of us in this forum make more assumptions then anything, myself included, but researchers are out there testing their predictions in the field. All the lab & field work that has been done over the years, i feel, is more then enough foundation to call this a BF theory and not a hypothesis. Edited March 2, 2012 by Caesar Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Transformer Posted March 2, 2012 Share Posted March 2, 2012 (edited) ^No argument you make can provide the necessary evidence to form a useful theory because there is no empirical evidence that meets any sort of rigorous standard when it comes to sasquatch. Therefore "the need to show that the theory is supported by many strands of evidence, rather than a single foundation" is not even close to being met. You may successfully argue for a "Hypothesis" regarding sasquatch but that is pretty well meaningless as that hypothesis has been waiting for proper evidence which would bring it into the realm of a real theory for hundreds of years. New evidence may be found however that supports a theory or downright proves the whole thing. Wouldn't that be fun? italicized phrase was added during edit. Edited March 2, 2012 by Transformer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 2, 2012 Share Posted March 2, 2012 Transformer In my opinion, hair samples, tracks, vocalization, and sightings in general are all the evidence needed to support a theory. What sort of evidence would you need to support a theory? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Bipedal Ape Posted March 2, 2012 Share Posted March 2, 2012 Must be next Thursday then Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimB Posted March 2, 2012 Share Posted March 2, 2012 (edited) http://youtu.be/b542GxhzYiw Edited March 2, 2012 by TimB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 2, 2012 Share Posted March 2, 2012 Back on this sidebar about "theory". Wildlife science is not about "theory". It is about observing and documenting wildlife. There is no "theory" of bears (for example), akin to the theory of gravity, or atomic theory. One may make theories about the aspects of bears (behavior, diet, etc), and those are open to the "testability" people keep talking about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Biggie Posted March 2, 2012 Share Posted March 2, 2012 Head's up Dr. Ketchum is now taking questions for the upcoming website on her facebook page.....anyone with questions is being encouraged to ask them. I'm surprised her site has not crashed from everyone's questions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest tracker Posted March 2, 2012 Share Posted March 2, 2012 What's ETT? I guess not, I'll try to isolate it and send a link of an example of ETT. Sorry not ExtraTerrestrial Tattoos, good one!. LOL. T Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts