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.
No, vaccine science is not settled. The fact that is has helped control some diseases does not mean the science is settled.
Vaccines have "helped control" every disease for which there is a vaccine. There is no question vaccines work; no question that they do not cause autism, no question that the risks of the diseases are orders of magnitude higher than the risks of the diseases they prevent.
No, science is never settled. Science also isn't a thing, per se. Science is a process; a type of thinking. To think scientifically is to think actively and critically simultaneously; to explore possibilities to their greatest extent and to uncover every possible fragment of information that can be uncovered.
As a fan of science, I can say I hate characters like Bill Nye. Men like Nye trivialize science and turn it into an article of pop culture. This allows it to be fluid, but also forces it into conformity. With that said, when he and his far more respectable colleague, Neil Tyson, point out the problem of scientific illiteracy in this country, they aren't far off. Far too few people actually understand the science behind issues like climate change or nutrition. They uphold whatever they believe to be true, rather it's electric cars saving the environment (where do you think that Prius' battery goes when you're done with it?) or that not eating gluten will help you lose weight, science has been trivialized and politicized so much that at this point, I feel almost no one actually understand what it is science tries to do.
In eighth grade I was taught that life began at conception and CO2 is a greenhouse gas. This was before the left started preaching the former was false and the right the latter was false.
I am still sticking with my eighth grade education.
In eighth grade I was taught that life began at conception and CO2 is a greenhouse gas. This was before the left started preaching the former was false and the right the latter was false.
I am still sticking with my eighth grade education.
Actually, the right does not preach that CO2 is not a greenhouse gas. I believe everyone acknowledges that CO2 is a greenhouse gas.
So we're going to be thinking that gravity doesn't exist and the earth doesn't revolve around the sun? Of course sometimes there are scientific facts. This seems like more Republican B.S. alternative fact nonsense.
Well, how's this? Science is not, nor has it ever been or ever should be, impervious to challenge. Neither is it static.
Well, how's this? Science is not, nor has it ever been or ever should be, impervious to challenge. Neither is it static.
Of course science shouldn't be free from criticism. However, not all criticism is valid. Often times, scientific claims are attacked by claims that are entirely unscientific, then the defense of "science should not be free of criticism" is used to defend the stupid criticism.
Let's compare science to people for a moment. Science is black people in this scenario. Should black people be free of any criticism? No. Of course not. Individual black people can and will make mistakes, just like anyone else. But if your criticism is "they're black," you're an idiot. Same issue with science. Siting the Bible or Gwyneth Paltrow's health blog, for example, are not valid arguments against science, yet too often, these sort of things are presented as if they are.
The Bible does not say the earth is flat. It does not address that issue. Nor does it say that the sun revolves around the earth.
The Bible strongly implies a three-tiered universe, with hell below, earth in the middle, and heaven above. "Up" is toward God and "down" is toward the Devil.
Think about it: if Heaven is in the sky above Australia, Jesus would have needed to do a good bit of hitchhiking before ascending vertically off the earth's surface and into Heaven.
Well, how's this? Science is not, nor has it ever been or ever should be, impervious to challenge. Neither is it static.
CBS had an interesting show on Neil Degrassi Tyson this morning. He started off discussing Einstein who made his first mark on the science world by upending centuries of " settled science" on gravity.
CBS had an interesting show on Neil Degrassi Tyson this morning. He started off discussing Einstein who made his first mark on the science world by upending centuries of " settled science" on gravity.
There's no such thing as settled science.
Sure there is....any science that supports the PC Liberal Agenda is '"'settled science;" all other science is not settled. I wonder what Bill Nye the Anti-Science guy thinks about "settled science."
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.
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.
