U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Science and Technology
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 03-10-2009, 12:16 PM
 
16,301 posts, read 24,240,875 times
Reputation: 8261

Advertisements

Science hasn't changed, but our understanding of the science has simply improved.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-10-2009, 01:16 PM
 
4,987 posts, read 7,766,432 times
Reputation: 2869
Quote:
Originally Posted by crystalblue View Post
think I am going to have to. Hate getting blindsided by missing planets and stuff.
LOL! Yeah, I know what you mean. Sometimes scientific conventions can be painfully slow to release information. There can be a number of reasons for that. Sometimes, it's a matter of sorting through all the facts before making a public declaration. Things can often get locked up wrestling with seemingly endless debates for decades or longer.

One classic example of jumping to conclusions was the announcement that evidence of life was discovered in a Martian rock found in Antarctica. While maybe it is evidence of life, it was later determined that what looked like a microbial bacteria fossil could have also been formed by geochemical processes. Rather than being certain, the subject has since had to backtrack as something uncertain.

Another flap was the reidentification of bodies within the solar system, which meant Pluto lost its status as a planet and is now being called a dwarf planet. The reason I'm saying it's a flap is because the decision to rename these things were made by a handful of people during a convention of astronomers, rather than being put to a vote among the entire body of astronomers. Some disgrundled astronomers raised the point of what exactly determines a planet anyway. Is it shape? Is it size alone? Is it location? And complaints are that the decision were made by theorists rather than by those who make actual observations. I don't think the disagreements are going to change anything now though in part because major conventions (as I indicated) are often painfully slow.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-10-2009, 02:14 PM
 
Location: Texas
51 posts, read 110,559 times
Reputation: 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by crystalblue View Post
I dont have a prob with new science, but they should announce it or something!
They do "announce" it. You just gotta read up on these things. School books are constantly updated because of new info coming out. I like to read scientific journals as well. This info is readily available. A lot of times the news will cover things though...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-10-2009, 02:23 PM
 
Location: Texas
51 posts, read 110,559 times
Reputation: 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by Asheville Native View Post
Science hasn't changed, but our understanding of the science has simply improved.
True. I suppose I should have emphasized that science itself hasn't changed. What changes is the information/evidence/new findings because of science.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-10-2009, 03:38 PM
 
309 posts, read 910,128 times
Reputation: 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by sndillon View Post
True. I suppose I should have emphasized that science itself hasn't changed. What changes is the information/evidence/new findings because of science.
What I think is funny is that all things change. Our perception of history, art, how we manufacture things, business methods, society itself changes constantly and regularly, but if 'science' discovers that some term is too vague or not adequetely defined, science becomes "unreliable" to the layperson.

Might as well say they are unreliable if they change their mind about anything.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-11-2009, 08:04 AM
 
4,987 posts, read 7,766,432 times
Reputation: 2869
Quote:
Originally Posted by dpgtfc View Post
What I think is funny is that all things change. Our perception of history, art, how we manufacture things, business methods, society itself changes constantly and regularly, but if 'science' discovers that some term is too vague or not adequetely defined, science becomes "unreliable" to the layperson.

Might as well say they are unreliable if they change their mind about anything.
For that matter, the entire universe involves constant change. Nothing stays the same forever. If there were no change, there'd be nothing new to learn.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Science and Technology
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top