This is retarded semantics. Experiments give scientists the data they need to solve problems. In other words, the purpose of most experiments is to gather information that will enable scientists so solve a problem or problems. So, yes, the whole ■■■■■■■ point of most experiments is ultimately to solve problems.
What’s your working definition of “problem” by the way? I foresee that being your next semantics refuge to scurry to.
That’s not science. That sounds like engineering to me.
lol - You’re a riot, especially given your chosen moniker.
1 - I was never comparing this experiment with the invention of the plane. The reference to that was to say that there were likely many, many small steps taken in aquiring the knowledge that finally got them flying. Just as this very small test is one of the beginning steps in trying to see if this is feasible.
2 - There is very credible evidence as pointed out in the article that particles in the atmosphere(from volcanic eruptions) do indeed block the sun and cool the earth.
3 - Please keep replying, you’re ■■■■■■■ hilarious.
The earth already has negative feedback mechanisms that have and will continue to keep it relatively stable… if the damn idiots stop trying to interfere. Hiding the sun is … insane.
If we put chemical X in the human body, it will cure the symptoms of disease Y.
That’s what I was going to say. I worked for nine years at an applied reaseach lab. We were all engineers and technicians.
(Your wiki is open.)
No, really. One reason is to solve problems.
Exactly. Sometimes experiments instantly solve a problem.
It’s simply a fact.
it’s not semantic. just stupid. plain idiocy to play around like this with the hopes enough sun can be blocked someday to get the earth’s temperature back down to…
say, what temp should the earth be? does Nature and/or CNN and/or NBC nention that?
How does achieving this temp relate to this idiotic “experiment”?
did you note in Nature’s giddy multi-page centerfold spread of this nonsense that barely anything was quantified?
learn some science.
Whether this particular experiment is worthwhile has absolutely nothing to do with your blanket assertion that scientists do not use experiments to solve problems. That assertion was hopelessly wrong. Realizing this, you have now reverted to “but this experiment is just, like, stupid and stuff.” It very well may be. It will likely be a waste of time and money. I’ve never endorsed the experiment. I wasn’t even going to post in this thread until I read the words “experiments are not meant to solve problems,” which is laughable on its face.
(Your wiki is open.)
Why do people keep saying that, is that like some guy joke?
You have already performed your experiments when you get to this point. You are no longer experimenting. You are collecting statistics. Or else your name is Mengele .
Oh, it’s science all right.
LoL 
You people… 
No. It means they left their wiki open and they are being advised to close it.
look up experiment per the scientific method and see if its “use” is to “solve problems”
( your 8th grade science book handy?)
Lol. Impressive double think there.
Sorry you missed the point of my post.
Lol. EPA has been rolling back and easing all sorts of regulations.
lol impressive avoiding answering the question
