Jump to content

Speculation (split from Great danger to the Earth)


Dropship

Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, Dropship said:

Speculation is FUN because it requires no evidence..:)

For example I like to speculate that the woman in the grocers fancies me..

!

Moderator Note

If you can’t be on topic, please consider whether you should post at all

 
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In a sense, a 'speculation' is a 'theory', many of which have no hard evidence, but we can still have fun examining them.

For example when Einstein first aired his Theory of Relativity he had no evidence, and it was years before science finally proved him correct..:)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Dropship said:

In a sense, a 'speculation' is a 'theory',

Not in any scientific sense. Theory is as strong as it gets in science. I suggest your suggestion renders the term meaningless.

39 minutes ago, Dropship said:

In a sense, a 'speculation' is a 'theory', many of which have no hard evidence,

I'm assuming you define "hard" as "a bar I can set wherever I want". Theories have models and mountains of evidence to support them. When they lack observational support, such as with String Theory, we rely more heavily on the models, but they still have to have evidence if they're considered a theory.

41 minutes ago, Dropship said:

For example when Einstein first aired his Theory of Relativity he had no evidence, and it was years before science finally proved him correct..:)

No evidence? Are you using your earlier definition of "hard evidence", because his work had plenty of observational evidence, and much of it was based on experiments carried out by others. His explanation solved the mystery with the orbital precession of Mercury. His explanations wouldn't have been credible at all if "he had no evidence". 

You make assertions rather than ask questions or pose problems, and many of those are either incomplete or just plain wrong. It makes you appear to be doing it consciously to waste time or provoke reactions. I wanted you to know so you can adjust your posting style, or at least know why you get so much pushback on many of your posts.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We define what we mean by speculation 

2 hours ago, Dropship said:

For example when Einstein first aired his Theory of Relativity he had no evidence, and it was years before science finally proved him correct..:)

But he didn’t call it “the theory of relativity” when he first aired it. The paper was “On the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies” and Einstein later referred to it as the relativity principle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Dropship said:

Is the Theory of Evolution a speculation or a solid proven fact?

 

16 minutes ago, swansont said:

It’s a theory and also a fact.

To expand on swansont's answer,  scientific theories grow in certainty, over time and as they continue matching observational and experimental evidence, and making correct predictions. The theory of evolution has gained so much indistputable evidence, it is now a fact.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, beecee said:

 

To expand on swansont's answer,  scientific theories grow in certainty, over time and as they continue matching observational and experimental evidence, and making correct predictions. The theory of evolution has gained so much indistputable evidence, it is now a fact.

 

Yes it's common sense that the fittest will survive , but there are still many missing links along the path of evolution.

I once asked Richard Dawkins about it and he replied "Of course there are missing links". 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, beecee said:

The theory of evolution has gained so much indistputable evidence, it is now a fact.

That’s not actually what I meant. Evolution has been observed - that’s what makes it a fact. There is also a massive amount of evidence that tells us the theory is correct.

9 hours ago, Dropship said:

Yes it's common sense that the fittest will survive , but there are still many missing links along the path of evolution.

That’s not the metric by which you assess a theory. 

There are areas on earth and in space where gravity has not been measured, but that does not call models of gravity into question. That would be a ludicrous standard to apply.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.