Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2001/04/30

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] Scientific METHOD not a game
From: Mark Rabiner <mark@rabiner.cncoffice.com>
Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 14:11:36 -0700
References: <200104301733.f3UHXIb25630@rakitzis.com> <NABBLIJOIFAICKBIEPJJKEHIJFAA.darkroom@ix.netcom.com> <200104302051.32d5@lh10.opsion.fr>

Oddmund Garvik wrote:
> 
> Lun 30 avr 2001 14:27:38 -0400
> "Austin Franklin" <darkroom@ix.netcom.com> a écrit:
> 
> > How can you do CO2 tests in the exact same conditions, years later...the
> > winds, the temperature everything atmospheric will have some bearing on
> > the tests.  Problem is, people can do/interpret tests to mean what THEY
> > want them to mean.  It's a game.
> 
Scientific tests are not a game Austin!
Why there should be more or less science in Photographic testing than
atmospheric observation i don't know.
Scientific tests are based on Scientific METHOD. That method is either applied
correctly or it is not.

1. Observe some aspect of the universe. 
2. Invent a tentative description, called a hypothesis, that is consistent with
what you have observed. 
3. Use the hypothesis to make predictions. 
4. Test those predictions by experiments or further observations and modify the
hypothesis in the light of your results. 
5. Repeat steps 3 and 4 until there are no discrepancies between theory and
experiment and/or observation. 



Mark Rabiner

Portland, Oregon
USA
http://www.rabiner.cncoffice.com/

Replies: Reply from ejm@pobox.com ([Leica] Re: Scientific METHOD not a game)
In reply to: Message from leica@rakitzis.com ([Leica] Re: Phew! I feel a LOT better now!)
Message from "Austin Franklin" <darkroom@ix.netcom.com> (RE: [Leica] Re: Phew! I feel a LOT better now!)
Message from Oddmund Garvik <garvik@ifrance.com> (Re: [Leica] Re: Phew! I feel a LOT better now!)