GeorgW said:
We have this discussion all the time in school. Half the class is on one side, and half is on the other. I'm on the side that it is not. I feel that a series of observations and guesses based upon them is not science. I'm of course not talking about all of biology as a field, but more about things like ecology and ethology. Biology is science, ecology is not, just making that clear. For exaples, once it was said that all ravens are black. Then one day, a white one was seen, so they corrected it. This is not a scientific method, that is guesswork. Maybe I'm just being ridiculous, but that's the way I feel.
So what about ecology is just making observations and guesses?
Ecology also produces testable hypotheses, and then runs experiments. Your example demonstrates a poor understanding of the kinds of questions ecologists are really tackling. No offense to you of course, I'm just saying: ecologists do more than look for white ravens.
Probably my favorite part of learning ecology was animal behavior, and in specific studying questions of nature vs nurture. The initial questioning of "Is nature or nuture more predominant" sounds very heady and philosophical, but it's been studying in extremely interesting ways by making hypothesis about things like the development of songs in song birds, and then running tests on those birds (i.e. depriving them of model songs as they are learning, brain lessioning, etc). People are then able to apply what they learn about animal behavior in nature, and make some predictions about human behavior, instincts, etc. Which is pretty useful stuff, I think.
And these experiments done in animal behavior and learning fall within the subset of ecology.
Ecological studies of the affects of humans on coral reefs or the rain forest also are scientific as well. My TA in my ecology class was studying strategies for reef regeneration, i.e. examining which sorts of substrates coral larvae prefer to settle and grow on, and specifically how sponges aid in the growth of coral reefs through a form of symbiosis.
This is all studied by making observations in the field, forming testable hypothesis, and then returning to the field to test those hypothesis.
How is that not science?
Grand_Arcana said:
Uszi said:
Grand_Arcana said:
I know you asked us to be civil, but your GF is a moron. What's incredibly moronic is that she considers Genetics a Science, but not Taxonomy, also known as Phylogenetics. Taxonomy is constructed using Genetics!
Someone who espouses a "moronic" line of thought =/= a moron.
She might be a highly intelligent but misinformed or under informed individual, for instance.
Ah, sorry, I've just wanted to play with the word "moron" lately. . .
