a response from skeptic,
Eva
> Scientists do not as a rule observe and then theorize. They
> typically do it the other way round. When they find the data does not
> confirm the hypothesis, the usual reaction is not to reject the
hypothesis,
> but to assume it was a bad set of data and proceed to draw another set.
First off, this person appears to be confusing the terms "hypothesis" and
"theory." They are two very different things. Next, if some scientist DID
proceed this way, throwing out data everytime it contradicted
previously-reached conclusions, one of two things would happen:
1) If the hypothesis is right, the contradictory data WAS wrong, and further
data sets will bear this out.
2) If the hypothesis is wrong, taking 1000 more data sets will show the same
thing, that it's wrong.
> These observations are well born out in the following article about
Well, not really.
> scientific heretics and particularly Thomas Gold, because he
> generated new data on the origins of oil and gas and geophysicists are not
> rejecting the conventional theory but Gold's data.
Ah yes, Tommy Gold. Another one of those sad cases of a scientist who comes
up with some interesting and groundbreaking work early on, then takes a left
turn into LaLa Land and becomes a "scientific martyr."
> Gold is an astrophysicist with impressive credentials
WITHOUT credentials in organic chemistry, or anything having to do with
petroleum, however...this is the old "he's got a PhD, he MUST be right" gag.
> More importantly he conducted and experiment which debunks conventional
> theory - he drilled for oil and gas where the
> conventional theory would predict none would be found and found both.
>...
> At considerable depth they found both oil and methane.
Last I heard, that was a dry hole. They drilled in Sweden, and came up with
a little bit of sludge that was terribly ambiguous.
> If he is right, there is much more oil and gas to be found than
> conventional models would indicate because they exist in
> places far removed from places the conventional theories predict and
therefore
> far from where oil and gas companies typically drill.
And so OF COURSE the Evil Scientific Cabal (backed in this case by the Evil
Petroleum Cabal) is ignoring his work, because we all know that oil
companies just aren't interested in finding NEW sources of their product,
noooooo. And as for the Swedes who (AFAIK) have to import all their oil,
they were just paid off to ignore these huge oil fields under their soil.
Right.
*************** Regards, Dave Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ****************
As much as the author would like to spend precious minutes of the rapidly-
dwindling time remaining in his life responding to your kind and thoughtful
letter about how he is going to spend eternity in a lake of fire being eaten
by rats, he regrets that he is unable to do so, due to the volume of such
mail received.
**************** http://members.xoom.com/dwpalmer/home.htm *****************
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
