The opposite. There is no “my hypothesis” when it is done correctly.
neanderthal!
1 Like
What do you mean by the opposite? “A hypothesis”… doesn’t really matter, a hypothesis arises from an individual or group of individuals.
that’s politics, not science
A hypothesis arises from evidence.
Instead of looking to support one over many, you look to destroy each one. The one that is most correct is the one that stands up to the destruction.
Last hypothesis standing.
No, that’s literally science
I’m not going to argue it, but @Ben_Natuf has a point if you stop and think about it.
no, that’s literally politics.
the way you test a hypotheses is not to politic support for it. It’s to attempt to prove it wrong and fail.
and fail again, and again, and again. after enough people fail, over a long period of time this hypotheses may develop into a theory, which if it stands the test of time may become a scientific law. has little to do with building consensus and everything to do with there being no other rational explanation.
1 Like
Yes, a hypothesis arises from evidence.
Once the hypothesis is developed, it is tested. The results of the testing either support the hypothesis or not. If it does, you continue with testing to confirm continued support. If it does not, the hypothesis is either modified or disregarded. That is the scientific method.
With respect to ACH, what you’re saying seems accurate. But the vast majority of ecological, biological, etc. studies do not employ ACH.
Sherman Kent had a lot to say about it. Brilliant man.
He was being coy, I wasn’t. I get it.
Assume good intent.
Im not sure you understand how science is done. lol. The results of a hypothesis are never even made known (broadly, at least) until the researcher publishes their findings.
Attempting to falsify a hypothesis and failing is exactly what supports a hypothesis.
All good
1 Like
no, it doesn’t. it only shows that that attempt failed. it in no way supports it being true and in no way suggests that some other attempt to prove it false might not succeed. scientist do not “support” hypotheses, they settle on them, grudgingly, because they’ve tried every which way they can to prove them false and have so far failed. Consensus is not science, its politics.
1 Like
I am sure your POV is the one in err.
Correct, in the peer review process after the fact. Allegedly. By somebody not involved in the case.
Why?..
and preferably a skeptic. although it would seem we have no more skeptics, they’re all heretics now
Are black people responsible for racism?
Yes and no. Some are and some are not. So are white people, brown people, yellow people etc. We are all responsible for our own behaviors. I don’t condemn or praise people by group. Grouping takes away individual accountability.
2 Likes
