(December 12, 2013 at 8:00 am)I and I Wrote: What "reality" is is different depending on ones environment they grow up in,
No, it isn't.
(December 12, 2013 at 8:00 am)I and I Wrote: and what reality is is a philosophical question not a scientific one.
It's both.
(December 12, 2013 at 8:00 am)I and I Wrote: "The margin of error grows less". How would one know that this is the case?
The number of facts contradicting the explanation grow less.
(December 12, 2013 at 8:00 am)I and I Wrote: Assimilating facts to support a position is hardly a way to a "truth", what facts are chosen or left out is based on human bias.
Not in science, they are not.
(December 12, 2013 at 8:00 am)I and I Wrote: Example: corporations conducting experiments on the safety of their products often are biased because of what facts are ignored, exaggerated parts can change ones perspective of a scientific study. It's still a scientific study by definition however the bias factor and subjective factors in analyzing the data in the study make it both scientific and bullshit.
Tobacco companies....the end.
Actually, its not a scientific study in that case. If there is any indication that certain facts have been exaggerated or ignored, then that constitutes grounds for dismissing the results as invalid.
