Science has been defined judicially

[warshipadmin]

Some busybodies put together a guide to science for US courts, the Reference Manual on Scientific Evidence 4th edition. Not surprisingly they define science.

"Communities engaged in scientific endeavors work with testable hypotheses. For a hypothesis to be testable, it must, by itself or in conjunction with other hypotheses, generate specific predictions—­ a set of observations that one could expect to make if the hypothesis ­were true and/or a set of observations that would be inconsistent with the idea and lead one to believe that it is not true. If an explanation is equally compatible with all pos­si­ble observations, then it is not testable and hence, not within the reach of science."

I can work with that, it's basically Popper using the word testability instead of falsifiable. It's not as powerful as the concepts Feynman uses in Cargo Cult Science, but it is a good start.

[JBG]

Me too.

Though I might have referred to the scientific method. That is only a preference though.

It is a concept too little understood these days. Think “climate science”.

Jonathan

[JBG]

Just saw what you did at Navweaps!

Having too much fun!

Jonathan

[warshipadmin]

Grins.

[Nightwatch2]

Same old Phil

[JBG]

Same old Phil

The first response to him was quite amusing.

Jonathan