How reliable is science? (Assumption 7/7) (The limitations of science)

by xeno6696 , Sonoran Desert, Friday, April 20, 2012, 03:13 (4599 days ago) @ dhw

dhw,-As has been made apparent to me from Tony and yourself in your response here...-I'm missing the point of your criticism. Technically, I'm college-educated and am equipped with the skills to be able to carefully weigh a "scientific" argument vs. one made from thin air, yet still logical. -I have no response for this, because as I alluded to previously... we're reaching an age soon enough were scientists are going to be interpreting evaluations from computers, studying relationships that are so complex that it would take a lifetime for a single person to understand. In computing circles, we already see this: An entire science is building up around the concept of data visualization, that unites psychology, mathematics, and data analytics... -The disconnect between the ivory tower and "the common man" is going to grow exponentially, and not even because of a deliberate effort. Statistically speaking, a human being absorbs more information in a year than a person in the 18th century would have access to in their lifetime. -http://www.teachertube.com/viewVideo.php?video_id=3051-^^^This cute little video should impart exactly HOW fast things are changing...
(Some of the stats are hopelessly outdated only after 5 years.)

--
\"Why is it, Master, that ascetics fight with ascetics?\"

\"It is, brahmin, because of attachment to views, adherence to views, fixation on views, addiction to views, obsession with views, holding firmly to views that ascetics fight with ascetics.\"