U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Unexplained Mysteries and Paranormal
 [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 10-11-2017, 10:52 AM
bg7
 
7,696 posts, read 9,107,552 times
Reputation: 15209

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluefox View Post
I really respect Carl Sagan. He was a scientist to the bone, and a genius, but more importantly to me, he exhibited that rare ability among scientists to think outside the confines of what is known. I feel the same way about Einstein and Carl Jung. They never abandoned the scientific method, but also were never afraid to try to see a larger picture with the vast knowledge and intellect they had available to them.


A scientist who sticks with what is already known wouldn't last long in any job requiring scientific research. What does your statement even mean? All scientists seek to discover new knowledge. That's basically their job.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-11-2017, 09:28 PM
 
Location: Seattle
7,587 posts, read 7,634,090 times
Reputation: 10748
Quote:
Originally Posted by bg7 View Post
A scientist who sticks with what is already known wouldn't last long in any job requiring scientific research. What does your statement even mean? All scientists seek to discover new knowledge. That's basically their job.
Absolutely not. What does the term "evidence-based research" mean to you? After all, it's the crux of most of the skeptics' arguments on anything that is remotely "unexplained". And it's completely fine, and often reasonable, logical, and scientific. And of course, science innovates. But new theories are largely based on the the body of knowledge and evidence already available. You don't just pull theories out of thin air.

Which is why scientists who are open to the idea of theories where the plausibility that isn't supported by hard evidence are often stigmatized. But Sagan was just a genius it didn't matter. This topic is the perfect example. There's no "hard evidence" behind this theory. It's just theoretical... yet at the same time scientific, even if not evidenced-based.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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 > Unexplained Mysteries and Paranormal

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2021, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - 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, 36, 37 - Top