by jackokie » Thu Sep 08, 2022 5:58 pm
@BuckeyeFrank LOL "Social Etiquette", vigorously applied.
I think you and spark have highlighted an extremely important aspect of doing "science". There is an enormous difference between "refuting" and "rejecting". Dr. Eric Lerner has engaged in the comments sections of Herr Doktor Professor Brian Keating's related videos to specifically and calmly, point by point, refute Keating's assertions about Lerner's IAI article and videos. When Keating asserted there are no other models that predict the observed phenomena, I replied with the Electric Universe model. And got this response from Keating:
Lol. The Electric Universe is more unreliable than electric power in California. Just curious are you or Eric even able to derive the basic formulas of electromagnetic plasma physics? If so, please demonstrate here. And with respect to the standard model please cite one formula that predicts galaxy sizes for JWST images in either the Big Bang or Lerner’s tired light nonsense.
I offer this as an example of "rejecting", in that he makes the claim that the model is "unreliable" without a single example of a failed prediction. It's pretty obvious he has not bothered to investigate it. The other parts of his response are similarly deflection to wave away the galaxy size issue and imply those offering the tired light hypothesis are promoting "nonsense". As far as a flat earth is concerned, my impression is that its proponents have to stretch pretty far to support their hypothesis, and I wonder at their motivations, but just rejecting it out of hand because it's "weird" is wrong; refuting it with counter-arguments is science.
@BuckeyeFrank LOL "Social Etiquette", vigorously applied.
I think you and spark have highlighted an extremely important aspect of doing "science". There is an enormous difference between "refuting" and "rejecting". Dr. Eric Lerner has engaged in the comments sections of Herr Doktor Professor Brian Keating's related videos to specifically and calmly, point by point, refute Keating's assertions about Lerner's IAI article and videos. When Keating asserted there are no other models that predict the observed phenomena, I replied with the Electric Universe model. And got this response from Keating:
[quote]Lol. The Electric Universe is more unreliable than electric power in California. Just curious are you or Eric even able to derive the basic formulas of electromagnetic plasma physics? If so, please demonstrate here. And with respect to the standard model please cite one formula that predicts galaxy sizes for JWST images in either the Big Bang or Lerner’s tired light nonsense.[/quote]
I offer this as an example of "rejecting", in that he makes the claim that the model is "unreliable" without a single example of a failed prediction. It's pretty obvious he has not bothered to investigate it. The other parts of his response are similarly deflection to wave away the galaxy size issue and imply those offering the tired light hypothesis are promoting "nonsense". As far as a flat earth is concerned, my impression is that its proponents have to stretch pretty far to support their hypothesis, and I wonder at their motivations, but just rejecting it out of hand because it's "weird" is wrong; refuting it with counter-arguments is science.