How much of science is fact?

[alex1314159]

My got my most humble apologies, That post itself was wrong, place "with" in-between ""a fact"" and ""true"".

We could be here a while.

 

[alex1314159]

replace god for got.

 

[SnowCold]

If it's all wrong, what is right?

Please, share with us.

 

[grimsprice]

replace god for got.

STOP IT! instead of posting again, just go up to your original post and hit the bit blue EDIT button.

 

[Smudge91]

With that said, I don't know if science can be trusted. What was fact a hundred years ago is now seen as naive hypotheses. Atomic theory used to be a joke, and even then the model of an atom became outdated within a few years. In physics, there are particles that make up protons and neutrons. From what we ?know? they are composed of quarks. It?s interesting, but I?ve never seen atoms, let alone quarks. And even if they do exist, how do we have a measurement of their mass? I don't know if I can trust if the speed of light is 300,000,000 meters per second. I don't see how it is possible for anyone to know that.

The idea of dinosaurs is also ridiculous. How can they date fossils? How do we know how accurate carbon dating is? Three million years is a long time and provides a large chance of error. The way dinosaurs look has changed a lot also. What was fact ten years ago is now outdated. Our knowledge of dinosaurs is changing at a steady rate. Theory that will never be fact is constantly changing and will always be accepted by the scientific community as well as the public.

/rant

firstly science works on the basis of falsification, if you can prove the theory false then it is fact. Science works with empirical data and so has to be prepared that if an event occurs with the same variables that one day it may not behave in the same way. Eg. we've seen the sun rise everyday but one day it may not.
Secondly science has come along way since the days of the 4 humours etc. With technology which now allows science to invesitigate at a smaller level and speculation is deemed unreliable science's validity has strengthed.
Your problem is more philosophical than a problem with science in all honesty.

 

[KaZZaP]

the world is flat! space goes on forever!

 

[Dioxide20]

*facepalm*

SHUN THE NON BELIEVER!!!!!

 

[DoctorObviously]

Bocaj2000, ... they did found bones of dinosaurs... like the others say, go to the internet like wikipedia or pick up a nice science book that explains everything clearly, plenty of those...

 

[ArcWinter]

Just because nearly nothing in science is pure, firm fact is no reason to go all nihilist and start a cult, OP. Most of the basic stuff is all backed up by stalkerish observation. Most theories that people perceive as facts have a 99% certainty.

But don't worry your little head about all that stuff, I mean, it doesn't even matter. A quark will not jump and mug you in an alleyway, your car will never be able to get fuel that allows it to go the speed of light. And dinosaurs will never be trying to win a beauty pageant, so you won't have to worry about age or looks.

I miss the days when we just had to survive. All this thinking is making everyone sound stupid!

 

[anNIALLator]

Nothing is ever 'proved' in science. That's for mathematics. Things in science have to, by definition, be potentially falsifiable. Three million years is not a very long time, only to our perception because we live for decades, not millenia. Carbon dating is very reliable because radioactive is always constant. Heat, pressure, erosion, do not affect it. As for the speed of light, that's pretty simple - Speed = Distance/Time. ( I think, for some reason I am terrible at rembering that equation.)

 

[anNIALLator]

*scientific* fact.

Fact: a ball falls downward every time.
Theory: Gravity, is an attractive force between objects of mass.

Fact: the plug in the wall can light up your lamp.
Theory: Flowing electrons can heat metals through resistance creating photons.


A fact, in short, is something that can be seen, felt, or sensed in some way. A Theory, in short, is an explanation of why those facts happen. Theories are not *scientific fact*, they are explanations of facts. And if new facts are found, theories are amended accordingly.

Exactly. Although, a fact is better defined as a verifiable piece of data.

 

[Timotei]

*snip* *snippity* *snip snip snip*

 

[Kuchinawa212]

Really? I think it's pretty clear cut. New break throughs happen all the time and that's why some stuff gets a little changed. But all wrong? NOOOOO it's at least they provide a basic set of rules to how everything (almost everything) works. And if you don't like it, then go make you own universal rules

 

[space_oddity]

As is with the internet, only an edited movie-still can express my displeasure:

[http://s172.photobucket.com/albums/w10/leejamesbamford/?action=view&current=1250045578493.jpg]

 

[Ghost8585]

Well this man here says something about science , also he is pretty funny (it's about 1min50secs in) .

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VIaV8swc-fo

Thanks for the link man! I always like finding new comedy. (well new to me anyways) ^_^

 

[Sightless Wisdom]

Think whatever you want, as long as you don't try to make other people see it your way, I don't give a damn.

 

[XJ-0461]

Well, the stuff you can see happening can be treated as fact, and most scientists never claim that theories are fact, they say that they are what are the most likey possibilities.

 

[Captain Blackout]

With that said, I don't know if science can be trusted. What was fact a hundred years ago is now seen as naive hypotheses. Atomic theory used to be a joke, and even then the model of an atom became outdated within a few years. In physics, there are particles that make up protons and neutrons. From what we ?know? they are composed of quarks. It?s interesting, but I?ve never seen atoms, let alone quarks. And even if they do exist, how do we have a measurement of their mass? I don't know if I can trust if the speed of light is 300,000,000 meters per second. I don't see how it is possible for anyone to know that.

The idea of dinosaurs is also ridiculous. How can they date fossils? How do we know how accurate carbon dating is? Three million years is a long time and provides a large chance of error. The way dinosaurs look has changed a lot also. What was fact ten years ago is now outdated. Our knowledge of dinosaurs is changing at a steady rate. Theory that will never be fact is constantly changing and will always be accepted by the scientific community as well as the public.

/rant

It's called math. Try some.

Math is the language we have developed to (amongst other things) map, codify, and understand the universe. While the particulars may be exceedingly challenging at times the basics are as simple as 1+1=2. I don't need proof of this, I can simply see it. From there I can build a picture of everything if I have enough data to begin with. Every time we get new data, we refine the picture. Dinosaurs are ridiculous because the picture changed? Holy crap that's like saying "The pyramids can't be real, we can't agree on how they were built!" We may not have every last bit of information but we have fossils, we have pyramids. As we study and collect data we refine our picture of what fossils are, and how pyramids are built.

Really, math, it's amazing.

 

[Casual Shinji]

In the end we don't really know anything. We create laws and ideas to try and turn the world into a reasonable place that we can try to understand. But we really don't. We can only proof what scientific laws allow us to proof. That's why today's science fact is tomorrow's science fiction.