10 - The Scientific Method Made Easy
 |
||
 |
 |
|
 |
||
The 'Made Easy' series explains the evidence of our origins, from the Big Bang to the human migration out of Africa. This video explains how we acquire this knowledge, and how ideas go from a hunch in a laboratory to accepted theories taught in school. The video cuts at the end, and the final sentence should read: "In the next video, I'll look at whether belief can be regarded as science."(Music: "The Harry Lyme Theme" written and performed by Anton Karas.)
Channel: Education
Uploaded: December 31, 1969 at 5:59 pm
Author: potholer54
Length: 09:55
Rating: 4.96
Views: 44109
Tags: atheism christianity creation evolution fundamentalism god Potholer54 science
Video Comments
|
wynd2007 (December 31, 1969 at 5:59 pm)
Its ok; just use use a towel to wipe your mouth and it'll go away. :)
tpbricknw (December 31, 1969 at 5:59 pm)
shitty.
zensho1 (December 31, 1969 at 5:59 pm)
Agreed.
potholer54 (December 31, 1969 at 5:59 pm)
"I am saying that it is far from perfect in practise for the simple reason that many scientists do not follow the objective method."It is far from perfect. But as Winstron Churchill said of democracy, it's the worst system except for all the others. In the long run you can't keep theories that work out of the science journals, and you can't keep theories that don't work in the classrooms.
potholer54 (December 31, 1969 at 5:59 pm)
"Sometimes, experiments lead to interesting but inexplicable results"I think a good example of this is the cold fusion hoopla about 15 years ago. The "discoverers" of this process by-passed the peer review process and went straight to making an announcement to the media. Maybe some journals rightly take the view that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
zensho1 (December 31, 1969 at 5:59 pm)
Actually, you have hit the nail on the head concerning another problem with publishing results. Sometimes, experiments lead to interesting but inexplicable results. Without a plausible, proposed mechanism some journals (via 'peers') are reluctant to publish.
clairewaldorf2 (December 31, 1969 at 5:59 pm)
Perhaps an example of snobbish resistence in the past would be Wegener's ideas about continental drift. Wegener was a climatologist who was speaking outside of his field when he proposed it. Of course, resistence in that case also had to do with Wegener's inability to propose a plausible mechanism.
zensho1 (December 31, 1969 at 5:59 pm)
In addition, the opinion of a more highly social standing scientist (e.g. a consultant physician) often outweighs the more intellectual approach a a 'mere' graduate biochemist - not becasue the biochemist is no less intellectual / clever, but simply because society values clinicians far more. It is snaobbery, quite frankly.
zensho1 (December 31, 1969 at 5:59 pm)
I agree that overall the we tend towards progress and increased knowledge.What I am saying is, if not for the fallibilities of humans, the progress could be even more rapid.I am talking from direct experience. I can assure you, results of research can sometimes not get published becasue of a 'mental block' by the 'peers'.
clairewaldorf2 (December 31, 1969 at 5:59 pm)
But surely conservative resistance to new ideas can be overcome by reasoned argument; otherwise, the success of new scientific ideas would never be possible and we should remain intellectually stagnant. |