in reply to Nanook

@nanook This is exactly correct. A theory is supposed to make cohesive sense of OBSERVED data. If new data comes along that breaks that cohesion, it shows the theory wrong. If one then uses the assumption, that the theory is correct to demonstrate the existence of unobserved data, that is not science, or a striving for the truth, it is arrogance and an attempt to prove onself correct. it is also circular reasoning.

This website uses cookies. If you continue browsing this website, you agree to the usage of cookies.

⇧