+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 13 FirstFirst 123412 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 125
  1. #11
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    480
    Thanks
    308
    Thanked
    578
    Reviews
    0
    The beauty in science is nothing is absolute. Ever.

  2. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to MrsBid For This Useful Post:

    Atropos  (28-10-2013),Boobycino  (28-10-2013),Renn  (29-10-2013)

  3. #12
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    8,806
    Thanks
    7,267
    Thanked
    9,720
    Reviews
    5
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by SAgirl View Post
    So time and time again on BH I see women arguing the so called 'facts' of science.

    I'm no scientist myself and although I know a lot about certain topics, there are heaps of things I don't know and don't 'research' either, unless its something I am interested in or directly affects me.

    I'm genuinely curious about people's beliefs in so called scientific facts. I mean often there have been things which scientists have apparently researched and 'proven' only for us to be told years later that they were wrong!

    To be honest, I often feel like I'm being made to feel stupid just for not agreeing with someone's opinion based on their apparent knowledge of 'scientific fact' and I just can't be bothered to research it myself and argue my point. (Sometimes I just like to give MY personal view or experience and leave it at that, whereas others seem to believe they are ALWAYS right and keep arguing their point and throw in the words 'scientific research' etc)

    I can see I'm going to be made to feel stupid here for my apparent lack of knowledge but oh well. Lets try play nice, I'm just curious.

    Do you believe everything science has 'proven' and WHY
    Your whole post comes off as very disdainful towards science and towards people who discuss scientific fact and how this factors into their personal decision making process- especially with scare quotes on words like facts and research as if they are dirty words and phrases like "so called research" I am also pretty sure that your post is, at least in part, directed at me because I told you in another thread that homeopathy has been scientifically disproven.

    The thing is, you can have your own opinion, but not your own facts. Some things are conclusively proven facts. Let's use an example- the earth is a rounded shape. We know it is because scientists have studied the earth and sent cameras and rockets and spacecraft with men on board into outer space and they have seen it, filmed it, photographed it. Many other areas of science confirm that yes, the earth is rounded. Say I tell you all this, and you say "well, I believe the earth is flat, it's my OPINION"- do you see? It might BE your opinion! But that doesn't make it any less incorrect.

    Science is not infallible. Science is not perfect. Science is ever evolving and changing as we learn more. What more do you want? Really, what more can you possible ask of it? We are humans, humans don't have all the answers- but we have scientific study and practical science that can be credited with the advancement of human kind. All the years of "research" and "scientific facts" mean we don't die at the age of 30 anymore, we can treat illnesses that used to kill people (like diabetes for example), we can actually prevent and eradicate deadly disease through vaccination, we can fly around the world, drive around the country, we can connect to people everywhere with the touch of a button, we have tv, we have refrigeration, we have laser freaking hair removal- ALL these things possible because of science!

    The reason 'personal experience' is not as valuable as scientific research when discussing things like alt med treatments is that personal experience is anecdotal and subjective. You have no way of knowing if a treatment worked or if another factor came into play. Just recently in that other thread someone stated their child got hyper from drinking sugary juice- other people showed her research showing that sugar doesn't cause hyperactivity. There were other reasons given as to why the child might seem hyper (perception, expectation on the parent's part- excitement on the child's part) and other chemical reason not related to sugar but related to salicylates. So one person has an experience and attributes it to sugar. But the facts are, sugar doesn't cause those issues. Correlation (child had sugar now child seems hyper therefore sugar causes hyperactivity) does not equal causation (child had juice, seems hyper, may be just excited or may be sensitive to salicylates).

    You say yourself that you aren't a scientist and rarely research. Should I moderate my posts because I do like to research things? Someone else choosing to research and choosing to share that knowledge is not done to make you feel stupid. If you "can't be bothered" to research or learn about something, that's your call. If I have bothered to do so and you say something I know to be factually incorrect, I will say so, because I don't like to see misinformation spread. Like is someone said vaccines cause autism- I would be the first one there correcting that- misinformation can be blardy dangerous.

    To answer your actual question, do I believe everything science is proven- it's a strangely worded question- science isn't a religion, it doesn't require believers. The role of scientific evidence in my decision making is this: I base my decisions on the best, most reliable and available information.
    So to reuse the homeopathy example, I have read numerous studies and a few cochrane reviews that have concluded that homeopathic remedies are no more effective that placebos. That has been demonstrated in numerous studies, over and over again. I have also looked at the theory of homeopathy and how is is supposed to work and have read scientific articles that explain how homeopathy is a scientific impossibility. So based on an overwhelming body of evidence and information, I can conclude that homeopathy is ineffective.

  4. The Following 11 Users Say Thank You to Atropos For This Useful Post:

    beebs  (28-10-2013),Boobycino  (28-10-2013),Busy-Bee  (28-10-2013),CMF  (28-10-2013),DJ Nette  (28-10-2013),HappyBovinexx  (28-10-2013),lambjam  (28-10-2013),Mod-Degrassi  (28-10-2013),Renn  (29-10-2013),risfaerie  (28-10-2013),Witwicky  (29-10-2013)

  5. #13
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    8,806
    Thanks
    7,267
    Thanked
    9,720
    Reviews
    5
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by MrsBid View Post
    The beauty in science is nothing is absolute. Ever.
    Exactly this! It is constantly evolving and changing as we learn more. We can only do what we can with the best info we have. Yes, sometimes science has been wrong. That is no reason to discount all science!

  6. The Following User Says Thank You to Atropos For This Useful Post:

    MrsBid  (28-10-2013)

  7. #14
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    360
    Thanks
    4
    Thanked
    102
    Reviews
    0
    Not everything, no. I mean, the Earth is round and the moon orbits the Earth which orbits the Sun and blah blah blah, those things are proven without a doubt. But with a lot of things, we're still learning, still testing theories. So for me it really comes down to the amount of proof and if it's absolute or not.

  8. #15
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    480
    Thanks
    308
    Thanked
    578
    Reviews
    0
    but there never is absolute proof in science and no scientist will ever claim there is. It comes down to reasonable doubt. even the earth and the sun and moon we know those things happen but its still never given as an absolute by anyone. it may be 99.999999% but its still never 100%

  9. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to MrsBid For This Useful Post:

    beebs  (28-10-2013),Renn  (29-10-2013),SoThisIsLove  (28-10-2013)

  10. #16
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    2,860
    Thanks
    1,248
    Thanked
    1,443
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Atropos View Post
    Exactly this! It is constantly evolving and changing as we learn more. We can only do what we can with the best info we have. Yes, sometimes science has been wrong. That is no reason to discount all science!
    No... but, isn't it a fair enough reason to approach current research with a critical eye? Lately, the issue around saturated fats have been used as a great example - science had "proven" saturated fat to be a cause of heart disease and we were all warned off our butter, animal fats, all that stuff and told to minimize all fatty intake. Now we are discovering cholesterol raised by saturated fat intake actually has a protective function toward the heart.

    So... who is to say even largely believed, government promoted "facts" will not be disproved n the future?

    For me, I try to do the as much reading as possible about a subject close to my heart or of personal interest, and use my personal experience, insight and even - most unscientifically - intuition to make decisions. Scientific research can be fascinating and enlightening but yep, it's fluid and should be taken as such, not the absolute answer to any given question.

  11. #17
    harvs's Avatar
    harvs is offline Winner 2014 - Spirit of BubHub Award
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    9,994
    Thanks
    6,239
    Thanked
    15,889
    Reviews
    1
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 posts
    Awards:
    Busiest Member of the Week - week ended 9/4/15Busiest Member of the Week - week ended 2/4/15Busiest Member of the Week - week ended 19/3/15Busiest Member of the Week200 Posts in a week
    My background is in humanities rather than the sciences, but I am a primary school teacher so I teach science and have to do a LOT of background reading because it is not an area that I naturally understand very well. I think there is, or can be, a disconnect between scientific data and the interpretation of said data. I learnt in my years and years of essay writing at university that you can prove/support any argument you want by providing a quotation that seems to support what you say, even if it's one sentence taken completely out of context. And I think this happens a lot in the science world. Climate change is a great example of this. Often you really need to go to the source to understand the full scope of an investigation and its results. Science is not always 'right', and our understandings of the scientific world are mutable and constantly evolving, but I think it is always the 'best fit' for what we know at the time.

    I don't believe it's patronising or discounting to say in response to someone giving an opinion, 'yea, but this is what science says'. An example of that was the discussion in another thread about tiles and carpet being the same temperature. Thanks to the explanation I now accept this to be true - it doesn't *feel* true to me, though! If you asked me I would swear black and blue that tiles are colder than carpet. In fact I remember reading that and thinking 'I don't believe that!' My feelings about the situation don't match up to the science of it. So to answer OP question, I don't always 'believe' Science, in that it doesn't match my view of the world, but I accept that the science is more likely to be correct. I'm wrong, despite my life experience and perception. My perception remains the same. I think it would be arrogant of me to decide that because this isn't my experience, then therefore the science is wrong. What I do believe in 100% is the scientific method, and level of academic rigour that studies are subjected to. And I trust that, so therefore I trust the results.

  12. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to harvs For This Useful Post:

    beebs  (28-10-2013),Mathermy  (28-10-2013),MummaJez  (28-10-2013),Redcorset  (28-10-2013),Renn  (29-10-2013)

  13. #18
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    19,776
    Thanks
    5,212
    Thanked
    7,063
    Reviews
    1
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 postsEmerald Star - 10,000 postsRuby Star - 15,000 posts
    Absolutely. I freaking love science! I find it very fascinating.

    I don't believe everything that is thrown at me and sold as 'fact' though. People could show me a study concluding one thing, yet another research paper could conclude differently. There is room for different interpretation, and this is often why many researchers disagree on many topics.

  14. The Following User Says Thank You to Benji For This Useful Post:

    Gandalf  (28-10-2013)

  15. #19
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    8,806
    Thanks
    7,267
    Thanked
    9,720
    Reviews
    5
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by BornToBe View Post
    No... but, isn't it a fair enough reason to approach current research with a critical eye? Lately, the issue around saturated fats have been used as a great example - science had "proven" saturated fat to be a cause of heart disease and we were all warned off our butter, animal fats, all that stuff and told to minimize all fatty intake. Now we are discovering cholesterol raised by saturated fat intake actually has a protective function toward the heart.

    So... who is to say even largely believed, government promoted "facts" will not be disproved n the future?

    For me, I try to do the as much reading as possible about a subject close to my heart or of personal interest, and use my personal experience, insight and even - most unscientifically - intuition to make decisions. Scientific research can be fascinating and enlightening but yep, it's fluid and should be taken as such, not the absolute answer to any given question.
    No one is to say certain facts will not change, but by the same token, what if they don't? I believe in decision making based on current available evidence. Example: current science shows that smoking tobacco promotes the likelihood of cancer and heart disease. Should I take up smoking because the current thinking might be one day proven incorrect? Of course not. Governments base their promotion of said facts on what the best available evidence shows at the time.

    Having a critical eye is good- it's how we separate good research from flawed, for example. I don't think I or anyone has said that science is absolute- it's constantly evolving in many areas.

  16. The Following User Says Thank You to Atropos For This Useful Post:

    beebs  (28-10-2013)

  17. #20
    lambjam's Avatar
    lambjam is offline Nitwit! Blubber! Oddment! Tweak!
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Canberra
    Posts
    7,177
    Thanks
    2,062
    Thanked
    4,956
    Reviews
    1
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 posts

  18. The Following 10 Users Say Thank You to lambjam For This Useful Post:

    Atropos  (28-10-2013),beebs  (28-10-2013),Busy-Bee  (28-10-2013),CakeyMumma  (28-10-2013),DJ Nette  (28-10-2013),Little Miss Sunshine  (28-10-2013),Mathermy  (28-10-2013),Renn  (29-10-2013),risfaerie  (28-10-2013),Witwicky  (29-10-2013)


 

Similar Threads

  1. No science minister for the first time since 1931
    By Atropos in forum General Election Discussion
    Replies: 53
    Last Post: 17-09-2013, 13:54
  2. Is Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Anti-Science?
    By Maybelline in forum Immunisation & Vaccines
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 11-06-2013, 12:43
  3. Replies: 6
    Last Post: 06-12-2012, 17:09

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
free weekly newsletters | sign up now!
who are these people who write great posts? meet our hubbub authors!
Learn how you can contribute to the hubbub!

reviews
learn how you can become a reviewer!

competitions

forum - chatting now
christmas gift guidesee all Red Stocking
Riverton Leisureplex
An Extreme Family Pass at Riverton Leisureplex is the ultimate way to cool off during the summer school holidays. The $30 Pass allows pool and waterslide access for 2 adults and 2 children, as well as a drink, popcorn and an icy pole for each person.
sales & new stuffsee all
The Health Hub
Give a new mum a fitness boost for Christmas & New Year. Studio-based, small group training sessions - cardio, strength, core, Pilates & boxing. Choice of 16 hrs per week, flexible-arrival feature - bubs & kids welcome! Gift vouchers available.
featured supporter
Carmels Beauty Secrets
An online beauty and wellness site which offers simple and effective time saving methods and tips which help you look younger for longer.
gotcha
X

Pregnant for the first-time?

Not sure where to start? We can help!

Our Insider Programs for pregnancy first-timers will lead you step-by-step through the 14 Pregnancy Must Dos!