----- Original Message ----- From: "Erik Reuter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, July 21, 2003 6:06 PM Subject: Re: Science and knowledge
> On Mon, Jul 21, 2003 at 03:01:20PM -0700, Deborah Harrell wrote: > > > Hey! What about the astronomy example I gave in my first post this > > thread: > > > > "And for an even longer timeframe from observance to 'scientific > > revision,' look at the change from an Earth-centered to a sun-centered > > system! :) " > > Not a good comparison. If we looked at the sun and planets but never > realized they were moving at all, then maybe you would have a point. > > The problem is that you are comparing a situation where we have a lot > of measurements and interaction with the element of interest and have > found NOTHING to support your claim, with various things that were based > on interpretation of data that did exist and just required further > refinement. NOTHING does not equal SOMETHING. I waited to allow someone else to come up with this one. We have no scientific means to allow people to tell if they are dreaming, even though dreams have been studied for thousands of years. We have means to see if other people are dreaming, but we have no means of someone telling if (s)he is dreaming. Dan M. _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
