|
Re: A Game Or Something |
I imagine the Wegener vignette will be used forever to rationalize an unscientific exploration into the vast unknown under the presumption that anything is possible in the physical world. Well, I'm not the first one to discover that everything is not possible in the physical world--there are limits to what is allowed by physical processes of nature. It would seem that those who have a great desire to explain the unknown should look for a non-science such as religion to develop their wild theories. The fact is that Wegener used scientific principles when he proposed his theory about drifting continents--his problem with acceptance was that the evidence had not been fully established during his time to prove it. It wasn't until Oliver and Isaac(?) during the sixties(?) (likely a huge error in memory there, sorry) who mapped the magnetic anomalies across the Juan de Fuca plate that the evidence for plate tectonics became indisputable. When you are dealing with a scientific subject, such as earthquake prediction, it is necessary to use scientific principles. If you choose to ignore the scientific foundation that has been developed over the past several centuries, then you run the risk of your board sinking into the abyss of pseudoscience. If you encourage all predictions no matter how looney the theory on which they are based, then you will lose credibility in the scientific community and they will not post on your board as a rule, although they may lurk just for the laughs. Follow Ups: ● Re: A Game Or Something - Cathryn 18:52:00 - 3/3/2001 (5713) (1) ● Re: A Game Or Something - dib 21:00:31 - 3/3/2001 (5715) (1) ● Re: A Game Or Something - Cathryn 23:26:03 - 3/3/2001 (5719) (0) |
|