Gordon commented: "Based on this, most astronomers are not scientists. I
guess it depends on what one means by "experimentation." Most
statisticians distinguish
between "observational studies" and "controlled experiments." The latter
permits the use of Pasteur's word "prove." But, strictly speaking, the
former does not. (The Tobacco Institute for years was quick to point out
that it had never been proven that cigarette smoking causes human cancer.
No controlled study has ever been made.)
I think Pasteur was being too restrictive."
Possibly. I see astronomers experimenting the same way anthropologists
and geologist experiment. While one cannot "run the universe twice," all
can posit a theory and then look for data to confirm/disconfirm. I'd call
this experimentation.
The Tobacco Institute is another matter. Since nothing in science is ever
"proven," their propaganda just makes use of this elementary attribute
of the scientific enterprise to obfuscate. I don't know how they sleep
at night.
John Burgeson (Burgy)
http://www.burgy.50megs.com
(science/theology, quantum mechanics, baseball, ethics,
humor, cars, God's intervention into natural causation, etc.)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Dec 29 2001 - 12:23:26 EST