The Half-Life Of Facts: Samual Arbesman

[verysincere]

There's that No True Scotsman rearing his head again.

Please learn the meaning of the term so that you don't continue misapplying it.

 

[Loudmouth]

Thanks for sharing this, bro. It aligns with what I've been saying for years; mainly that facts grow stale quickly and have a short shelf life.

No, you claim just the opposite. Thalidomide was yanked off the shelves in the early 1960's. It has been almost 45 years since it was discovered that it causes birth defects. Are you really saying that in a few more years you will tell everyone that thalidomide is now safe for pregnant mothers?

Do you even think about the words you say?

 

[CabVet]

There's that No True Scotsman rearing his head again.

No AV, these are not and never were facts.

Earth being our 3rd planet isn't a fact either, is it?

It is an hypothesis?

That would be correct. All of the data that we have at hand indicates that the Earth is the 3rd planet, but the Earth being the 3rd planet is not a fact, it is a hypothesis. That hypothesis might be 99.99999% correct (again with the data we have today), but there is a 0.0000001% chance that it is wrong.

 

[Loudmouth]

Earth being our 3rd planet isn't a fact either, is it?

It is a convention. We could just as easily start counting from the outside towards the middle. Using your definition of planet, Earth would be around the millionth planet in the solar system after we get through all of the planets in the Oort cloud, Kuiper belt, and the asteroid belt between Mars and Jupiter.

 

[AV1611VET]

Please learn the meaning of the term so that you don't continue misapplying it.

No, thank you.

Why should I learn the meaning of the term, if it's going to require I have to stop misapplying it?

 

[AV1611VET]

Thalidomide was yanked off the shelves in the early 1960's.

Um ... that's not what I've heard.

I hear it's still being sold.

 

[AV1611VET]

That would be correct. All of the data that we have at hand indicates that the Earth is the 3rd planet, but the Earth being the 3rd planet is not a fact, it is a hypothesis. That hypothesis might be 99.99999% correct (again with the data we have today), but there is a 0.0000001% chance that it is wrong.

Wow! against those odds, who would dare call it a fact!

 

[CabVet]

Um ... that's not what I've heard.

I hear it's still being sold.

It used to be non-prescription over the counter. Now it is heavily controlled, but you are correct, it is still sold:

Thalidomide - PubMed Health

 

[Loudmouth]

Um ... that's not what I've heard.

I hear it's still being sold.

Is it still being prescribed to pregnant mothers? According to you, there shouldn't be a problem with this since the fact that it causes birth defects was discovered 45 years ago, so it is no longer a fact.

 

[CabVet]

Wow! against those odds, who would dare call it a fact!

Not me. But even if we did find a "lost" planet between us and the sun, not a single fact about the earth would change. Here are some facts:

Earth's Circumference at the Equator: 24,901.55 miles (40,075.16 km)

Earth's Circumference Between the North and South Poles: 24,859.82 miles (40,008 km)

Earth's Diameter at the Equator: 7,926.28 miles (12,756.1 km)

Earth's Diameter at the Poles: 7,899.80 miles (12,713.5 km)

Average Distance from the Earth to the Sun: 93,020,000 miles (149,669,180 km)

Average Distance from the Earth to the Moon: 238,857 miles (384,403.1 km)

 

[AV1611VET]

Is it still being prescribed to pregnant mothers? According to you, there shouldn't be a problem with this since the fact that it causes birth defects was discovered 45 years ago, so it is no longer a fact.

Excuse me ... you said it was 'yanked off the shelves', did you not?

I believe it's been yanked back on the shelves.

 

[AV1611VET]

Not me. But even if we did find a "lost" planet between us and the sun, not a single fact about the earth would change.

I disagree.

 

[Skaloop]

I disagree.

Which fact(s) about the Earth would change if a previously undiscovered planet were found between Earth and the Sun?

 

[CabVet]

I disagree.

How so? What facts about the Earth would change? Would we have to call the "new" third planet "Earth" and then call ourselves Mars? Would the time it takes for the Earth to orbit around the sun change?

 

[Skaloop]

This is a subject I have talked with many people on here. How we go from Darwinism to hyper Darwinism to a post hyper Darwinism. Things tend to change over time. Einstein had a new and a different theory of gravity. The old theory could get us to the moon. But to go beyond that required a new theory.

Now you're talking about theories; the OP was about facts. Theories can certainly change, but facts do not. And that doesn't mean the theory was wrong; it was just incomplete. The knowledge surrounding facts could change, and facts can certainly be expanded upon or refined, but they don't really change.

For example, it is a fact that Obama won the election. It is also true that Obama won the election over Romney. It is also true that Obama won the election over Romney by getting 332 electoral votes.

See, there's the initial fact that Obama won the election. More information is added to that fact to refine it, but that initial fact remains the same.

 

[verysincere]

Excuse me ... you said it was 'yanked off the shelves', did you not?

I believe it's been yanked back on the shelves.

In addition to the generally pointless nature of this thalidomide debate, the details vary greatly with the country. Indeed, thalidomide was NEVER "on the shelves" in many countries---because it was restricted to clinical trials but never for general sales (as one example.)

In any case, thalidomide does not illustrate a change in scientific facts or the scientific method. Judgment calls about licensing and control of side effects are made for a wide range of reasons, not all of which are empirical per se. It makes a rather useless illustration, just as the Challenger O-ring judgement calls says nothing about scientific laws and theories being "unreliable."

Obviously, this futile topic has found its way into a creation-evolution forum because some think that it somehow discredits the scientific method. Accordingly, it reveals more about ignorance of the scientific method than anything profoundly didactic that advances the broader debate. But for those who wish to deny the facts of the evolutionary processes, it's all they've got to work with.

 

[AV1611VET]

Which fact(s) about the Earth would change if a previously undiscovered planet were found between Earth and the Sun?

The one that says the earth is the third planet from the sun.

Earth is the third planet from the Sun,

SOURCE

 

[AV1611VET]

Obviously, this futile topic has found its way into a creation-evolution forum because some think that it somehow discredits the scientific method.

If my aim is to discredit the scientific method, I'll give them this: 74

 

[CabVet]

The one that says the earth is the third planet from the sun.
SOURCE

Oh, the one that is not a fact? Ok.

 

[AV1611VET]

Oh, the one that is not a fact? Ok.

Okay then ... please give me an example of something that is a fact.