(April 24, 2013 at 3:37 pm)Rhythm Wrote: Absorbed and interested? I'd say im pretty well there, and even contributing to the way your communicate you idea. Notice that your points have been boiled down - and you're no longer repeating absurd things that are not required to make whatever point you wish to convey?
Some people are just ungrateful.
1) nothing in science is taken seriously unless it has been verified in the peer review system.
Correct (and that peer review process is fairly hefty)
2) the peer reviewers are human beings, and there is a distinct possibility that one reviewer of the submitted evidence could potentially interpret it in a completely different manner from another reviewer.
Correct, human beings do human things. Which, in this case, is great.
Thank you for addressing those points.
(April 24, 2013 at 3:37 pm)Rhythm Wrote: To repeat- if any of them can produce conclusive results, and specifically those to which other interpretations are bereft- then we'll see that interpretation put forward as the best explanation -business as usual.
Do you believe the following is possible: some theories will never have a conclusive "single" interpretation; that is, some theories will, forever, remain ultimately inconclusive? Or, are you confident that scientists will eventually get to the bottom of the matter in all disciplines of science?
