|
Not Ranked
:
+0 / -0
0 score
Re: Science is mere info/data?
Collecting hard data is solid, but the use or interpretation of the data becomes subjective. If I collect data at Starbucks, the data is what it was. How I use this data is subjective. The point that was made tat there are a lot of variables that need to be taken into consideration is correct. These considerations help limit the subjectivity when interpretting the data.
The path I took was conceptual modeling. This reduces things down to the bare bones of understanding so that even someone with limited knowledge or exposure can catch the drift. If one can not reduce a theory to barebones it might contain too much intellectual fluff and/or be a secret handshake of one group. Alternately, if one reduces existing theory down to the barebones, if it is not consistent with common sense and basic or universal undertanding it may be more subjective than was originally thought.
I use this example often because it is a good example of a concensus subjective theory, i.e, the earth's iron core. There is no hard data, only circumstantial which does indirectly suggest an iron core, i.e., iron is all over the solar system and the iron can be magnetic. Even a child can observed and play with an iron magnet. But the fact remains an metallic iron core needs to somehow separate from all the oxygen of the earth, which everywhere within the earth, without forming rust or iron oxide. A rusty iron core has problems with magnetism unless the iron was induced magnetic before the rust. This stretches things too thin. Nickel was circumstantially added to the iron core because nickel can also be magnetic.
The iron core theory is so dogmatic that new theory attempts to retain it with asteriods and then add the water second with a second wave of asteroids. Even that theory has problems. The critical state of water can dissolve all minerals and therefore can reach the mantle from the surface. This implies plasma water in the upper mantle that should diffuse as H through the mantle oxygen to the core and start corrosion. Once this begins the large size of the core, i.e., size of mars, should cause the ocean levels to drop over time. This does not appear to be occurring. The iron core is a good example of science hiding behind fuzzy data, and subjective theory being presented as reality science. Conceptual consistency allows one to reason through the subjectivity.
|