Quote:
Originally Posted by tjinaz
I think the point of the whole movie is that science zealots do exist. If one scientist does an experiment that shows an outcome other than the Neo Darwin theories they are shunned. I don't think Ben Stein is a religious extremist but that he would like those that have opposing views and have data to back that up be heard.
|
Suppressing opposing theories that have merit and can withstand the process of peer review is extremely
unscientific behaviour. The very basis of the scientific method is to reject assumptions and to search for knowledge based on facts and empirical evidence.
Suppose a scientist performs an experiment and the results contradict the theory of evolution. He then has his study published in a journal to be criticized by other scientists, and his methodology is determined to be sound, and other scientists are able to repeat his experiment under the same conditions and receive the same results. What do you think would happen next?
A) The scientific community would shun the scientist and reject his findings because it contradicts their previously held theories?
or
B) Scientists would accept the results, proceed with further experiments, and modify their theories accordingly.
I don't know of a single scientist (and I know many) who would choose answer A).
One of my favourite quotations comes from the astronomer Carl Sagan, who said:
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Carl Sagan
In science it often happens that scientists say, 'You know that's a really good argument; my position is mistaken,' and then they actually change their minds and you never hear that old view from them again. They really do it. It doesn't happen as often as it should, because scientists are human and change is sometimes painful. But it happens every day. I cannot recall the last time something like that happened in politics or religion.
|