So then are you saying that we (people) know all that there is to know right now at this very moment?
I would certainly like to believe that you are not suggesting such a thing as I am sure that you are not.
No, but I would feel plenty safe saying there are some things we DO know.
Since our knowledge is currently limited, our ability to fully discern the information before us is also limited.
Granted. But it does not mean we cannot fully discern ANYTHING.
The current model as best assembled by scientific leaders of today is just that "The Current Model".
Blatantly false.
EDIT: I know it's a couple days later but I noticed that I made a mistake when writing this. The current model is indeed the current model. I misread it as something else. I will leave this edit and the date I made this mistake here:
sept 12th
I apologize.
The current model 100 years ago did not contain sub-atomic particles, multiple universes, a universe that is at least 90 billion light years across; those are all current constructs of the best efforts of today's leading scientists yet they all lack two fundamental elements: completeness and unchanging steadfastness.
Completeness is something being worked on constantly.
Unchanging steadfastness is NOT a virtue of science but of dogmatism, which never changes, never adapts to new data, never admits wrongdoing, denies reality to preserve itself when shown wrong. The fact that science is NOT steadfastly unchanging is a huge virtue.
Not one model is complete, and beyond a shadow of a doubt will inevitably change.
But on what scale will they change? There are usually NOT complete total overhauls of a system nowadays, there are refinements of mechanisms. It doesn’t matter if gravity is caused by gravitons or the curvature of spacetime or the Higgs Boson or even photons, it doesn’t change the fact that things fall to earth at 9.8 m/(s^2) until they reach a maximum caused by air resistance.
[qoute]
But why; why must they change, if they are correct now then they should be correct forever.
[/quote]
And yes they will be. But because we don’t 100% understand something doesn’t make the 90% we understand wrong. Maybe 5 or 10 % that will be fixed with we discover the next 5% or so, but that everything we know is wrong because we don’t know it all yet is a preposterous claim. How do you drive a car? How do you board a plane or a ship? How do you stay under your roof? After all, we don’t understand all that 100% but you sure don’t seem scared your keyboard and mouse won’t electrify you.
They must change because we (humans) have incomplete knowledge, as we learn new things we throw away what we thought we knew because now we know that what we thought we knew was wrong.
And that is change. That is why science holds being able to change as a virtue.
Does anyone still teach geocentrism or flat-earth geography,
Actually, yes. Google the “flat earth society”.
what about America(s) which did not exist until the late 1400's.
What about them...?
No, because they were all wrong even though at the time they were believed to be right.
Yes. And even if we don’t fully understand electricity and atoms and electrons, your keyboard still won’t electrify you if used right, your house’s ceiling won’t fall in on you spontaneously, and the internal combustion engine in your car won’t backfire to explode the gas tank without significant structural damage. Are we wrong because we don’t ‘fully understand’ those?
Metherion
Linear Mode
