Question:
Why isn't this called "Alterrnative TO science" since it deals with stuff that is anti-scientific.
Stacy
2006-11-15 23:16:39 UTC
Are you going to add a section on so-called "Intelligent Design" next?
Six answers:
2006-11-15 23:20:12 UTC
I guess so. And a section on pixies and leprechauns. And a Unicorn watching section.



Like there isnt; already enough of this rubbish under "Religion" and "Folklore" now we have Yahoo pretending that it's science. Which retards at Yahoo believe that there is any semblance of science to psychism, dragons and astral travel?
iMi
2006-11-17 07:45:10 UTC
My post to a similar question:

Seems to me it would be alternative topics in science. Stuff we aren't really sure about can be disgusted scientifically here (like aliens, ghosts, teleportation, telekenisis, and yes I realize some of those have much more evidence and understanding than others).



This is a good section to have in the science section. Scientists want to encourage people to use logic and proof to come to conclusions, and there are many subjects that can have science applied to them but that are not yet fully explained by it. Unlike other forums where this sort of thing comes up we can explain things here using fact rather than fantasy or the old "that's stupid" "don't be silly" method which is based just as much on faith as saying something is absolutely true without thinking about it.



Truely fanstastical ideas (like pixies I'd imagine) are easily discounted by science (brain size, evolutionary evidence, lack of evidence of existance, wing/body ratio).



Don't make me get out my copy of Contact to lecture you about "science fiction". ;)









Intelligent Design is a good candidate for this section... if it wants to be considered a science (which, let's face it, is the whole point it was... ahem... made up"). We could get into a good discussion about either why it isn't a science in the first place (being faith based and all) or quickly disprove it with science.
bldudas
2006-11-16 15:15:17 UTC
Many of the things on here can be scientifically proved with the right equipment. The subjects on here can, and probably will be proved or disproved scientifically in the future.



Intelligent design is not a real science.
Luha
2006-11-16 19:49:05 UTC
Most people are not as honest as you are and too many people are too polite to call them on it.



Anybody who believes in ID has to explain the human appendix to me. or the detachable retina. of a lot of other flaws in the "design" of the human body.
Ehran V
2006-11-17 18:02:35 UTC
What is "anti-scientific" about paranormal phenomenon?

Many of those who are interested in the paranormal try to approach things in a manner similar to those of science and utilize scientific methodology.

If anything, your unwarranted and opinionated bashing of a whole category of study seems "anti-scientific" as it seems that you have already decided the outcome of any inquiries are based wholly on your opinion(s).

Even scientists will admit that they haven't yet managed to explain everything.



P.S. speaking of ID, have you been touched by his noodly appendage? http://www.venganza.org/
2006-11-17 01:27:50 UTC
Some things have a scientific explaination, but are not used by doctors because there is no money to made in it.


This content was originally posted on Y! Answers, a Q&A website that shut down in 2021.
Loading...