[Jack Simth]

Originally posted by spoon:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jack Simth:
They have a great track record for stuff that can be locally checked, and repeatedly done (physics, electronics, chemestry, et cetera). On things that happened in the distant past, science has a track record of primarily agreeing with popular politics of the day and place.

That is simply untrue. Science has a track record of proposing theories that are uncheckable at the time, and then prove out to be true when the means to check them becomes available. And when those theories don't match the observed data, they are modified or replaced with better ones. Popular politics does not even figure into it, except to create a degree of inertia for new ideas to overcome before they are taken seriously.

---

On repeatable, locally checkable stuff (a few decades of tech lag doesn't preclude the currently unspecified definition of local I'm using), they do have a good track record. I'm not contradicting orbital mechanics, relativity, or quantum theory here; I'm referring to extrapolations into the distant past. For those, the ones considered credible do pretty much correspond to the politicical winds; one example:

From http://www.evolution-facts.org/3evlch29b.htm
LYSENKO—Trofim D. Lysenko (1893-1976) rose to power in the 1930s in the U.S.S.R. by convincing the government he could create a State Science that combined Darwinian evolutionary theory with Marxist theory. With *Stalin's hearty backing, Lysenko became responsible for the death of thousands. Many of the best Russian scientists were put to death.

Long after Lamarckian inheritance had been abandoned elsewhere, Russia retained this belief. Refusing to accept that each generation must be educated anew, Marxism felt that Marxist revolution principles would enter the genes and transform society into thorough-going Communism! Under Lysenko's dominance of Soviet science, "Mendelist" genetics was a forbidden doctrine, a bourgeois heresy. Lysenko was finally ousted in 1965 when his theories produced agricultural disaster for the nation. (He claimed to be able to change winter wheat into spring wheat through temperature change, and wheat into rye in one generation.)

The russian regeme needed a quick change theory, and so accepted the guy on the spot - it wasn't until he caused a famine with his experimentation, and hence his theories became politically untenable, that he was finally thrown out.

Originally posted by spoon:

quote:

---

Originally posted by spoon:
Of course, the statement should have a conditional in there, like, "...they will LIKELY answer all objections, or provide a new model that does."

Originally posted by Jack Simth:
Such an alteration fits under the heading of "something like...".

Just wanted to make sure your straw man was properly stuffed...

---

Not exactly a straw man, as the clauses I didn't include weren't in the post I had been half-refering to when I listed the faith statement earlier:

Originally Posted by Imperator Fyron (Member # 1794) on March 17, 2003 08:15 in a long-dead thread

[...]
Once all of the evidence can be taken into account, the theory will be adjusted to fit.
[...]

There were no clauses in there about "likely", nor replacement, as your Version would have it include.