At 12:16 AM 6/6/2005, you wrote:
I sometimes get into arguments with anti-science associates, who are into wholism, mysticism, spiritualism and so forth. They think that scientists are an elite with their own brand of 'ism (scientism, perhaps), which is no more valid than these other 'isms. I point out to these people that if they have figured out they have to open their mouth in order to put food in it, turn a handle to open a door, vibrate their vocal cords to make a sound, then they have performed a scientific experiment and abstracted a theory from it. If science is an 'ism, it's the most basic one in the world.

Rant follows from RM:

I agree. But even the best scientists won't take a look at the data unless it's properly ordered (an Excel or Statistica spreadsheet would be nice.) AND there has to be a chunk of *serious* money attached. Personally, I'd like to see some of the bright scientific lights (such as found in this group, IMHO) tackle the basic problems the professionals can't seem to find the time to address. Did you know for example, that Homeland Security spent untold millions of dollars and two years trying to detect Marburg (and other) virus particles (0.9 u diameter) using only the great tools of C and S band radar? (5 and 10 cm wavelength respectively)? Without promising any money, can anyone here see a very basic flaw in that design????

As "Stevie" in "Malcolm in the Middle" might say. . .
Two. . .years?


Reply via email to