(December 21, 2017 at 10:11 pm)CapnAwesome Wrote:(December 21, 2017 at 4:46 pm)wallym Wrote: This is a weird argument, but even if the data/findings were suspect, you could take their findings and use it as a 'possible lead' of sorts in further experiments.
Is it a weird argument? I mean if you can't prove that Nazis were telling the truth in data you can't repeat, what use is it? I'm talking only about the concentration camp experiments and such. Not their early rocket science or engineering or stuff like that, because obviously we can repeat and test that.
But the experiments on humans? Seems pretty suspect. Think of all the racialist insane pseudo science these guys believed in. My default position, and that of all scientists, is a skeptical. So if you can't repeat the data, it's just useless. One of the requirements of science is that experiments are repeatable. It's not a suggestion, it's a requirement for something to be science. I don't know how anyone can say they were meticulous about their science. That's clearly not the case with tons of the crazy shit their believed in. If I'm going to be skeptical of any experiments, it's definitely going to be done by pseudo science believing NAZIS.
But that said, yes you could use it as a lead, like you can use anything you like as a lead.
I mean arguing about the value of nazi experiments as it relates to stuff in general is an odd topic. Not the content of the arguments.
And I don't know the details of the nazi science experiments. But if they had some conclusion that would be valuable if true, you could certainly look into it. Obviously by trying to test the conclusion in a non-nazi experimental way.
