haha that shit right there made me lol. Sometimes you're just too funny Gruss.
. On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 2:27 PM, Gruss Gott <grussg...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Well, I would say the analogy is hypotheses based on casual observation (flat > Earth) versus scientific theories based on macroscopic, precise measurement > or at least predictive calculation (relativity, the standard model, etc) > > For example, "cycles" is a reasonable, but casual observation as in: > - "these lights are blinking out of sequence" or > - "these numbers seem to cycle up and down" or > - "the earth appears to be flat" > > Of course none of these casual observations attempts to quantify and qualify > why. Scientific theories are born when you get down to measurements at > scale, accuracy, and precision. Or at least unassailable predictive > calculation. > > "Cycles" is a casual SWAG, just like a flat earth: reasonable, yes, but not a > scientific theory. > > Unless there is a scientific theory of "cycles" that can predict next years > weather/temp ... > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now! http://www.amazon.com/Adobe-Coldfusion-Anthology/dp/1430272155/?tag=houseoffusion Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:352980 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/unsubscribe.cfm
