Re: solution to the world's energy needs

[Taylor Stafford <krause@CLEMSON.EDU>]

> Collins & Pinch note the existence of the following problem.  Suppose that
> a new advancement in science develops like so:
>
>     Theory says that a phenomenon is impossible, yet we observe it.
>
>     We are confident that theory is right.  Therefor our observations
>     must be faulty, and we can ignore them as mistakes/artifacts, and
>     go on to other things.
>
>     But what if our observations are correct?  But they can't be!  How
>     can we dare to even question, much less modify, such solid theory?
>
>     The phenomenon is difficult to produce.  Anyone with the slightest
>     emotional bias against it will invariably make a mistake in attempted
>     replications, or will give up prematurely before attaining success.
>
>     Nobody else believes our reports.  We barely believe them ourselves.
>     Until somebody figures out the location of the "hole" in current
>     theories which allows such phenomena to exist, Science as a whole
>     continues to insist that they are just errors in observation (or
>     maybe hoaxes!)
>
> Therefor theory determines observation, and not the reverse?!!!


Hear Hear!

Taylor Stafford, Ph.D.
Department of Astrophysics and Interchronous Transportation
Andromeda Academy


"Any scientist who says of an observed event, that it couldn't happen
because we don't understand how or why it could happen, is a poor
scientist."- T.Stafford

"Don't tell me I'm burning the candle at both ends -- tell me where to
get more wax!!"

"You have reached an imaginary number.  If you require a real number,
please rotate your telephone by 90 degrees, and try again." Anonymous

    "Do you pray for the senators, Dr. Hale?"
     "No, I look at the senators and pray for the country."
     --Edward Hale (1822-1909), US author and clergyman

The box said "Requires Windows 95 or better." So I bought a Macintosh.