Sunday, January 15, 2006

Scientific Evolution of Theory

In recent weeks we have seen the discourse and discreditation of the work of Korean stem cell research. A peer reviewed publication in a “reputable” scientific journal.

Also we have seen the discovery of methane production during the respiratory process of living plants .This changed the existing theory by reevaluating the model process and its variables, This was unusual but not unique it that it questioned existing textbook theory.

These are the norms of scientific enquiry. Just because it is published in a reputable journal or an existing theory says x =y does not mean it is cast in tablets of stone !.

This is where the MSM and focal groups fail badly .In the urgency of brand promotion they accept what is written is Gospel .It is not it is still merely best theory that is formed through the scientific process.

The transformation of the interpretation of science and the contemporary views on the ways science operates in both form and validation, and the variances of the determinants of science have caused obfuscication of the basic tenets and norms of the characteristics of the scientific model. This has formed an ideological involvement in scientific validation that has created uncertainty and confusion. and. a convergence between reality and virtuality that have obscured the outcomes and development.

The loss has been one of order and objectivity, and its replacement by chaos and controversy. The underlying philosophical conditioning, the interpretation of the results, rather then the scientific model and reality. The Divergence from Realism and its objective reality and existence to one of the Feyerabend model of anything goes and his promotion of anarchy as an antidote against epistemology and the scientific method.

Just because you read it in your favorite newspaper does not mean it is factual or it will not be subject to revision.

Now we have more breaking news of fabricated research by a Norwegian Researcher into cancer research that was published in the Lancet.

This is why we need to question the thinking and objectivity of having Sue “thousands will die”Kedgley as Chair of the parliametary Health select committee.Every time new research into risk probabilities of various health risks is published she preaches her Gospel of factual disorder.

http://www.physorg.com/news9901.html

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home


Web Counters