<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: Trusting the science	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://www.spencergreenberg.com/2024/11/trusting-the-science/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://www.spencergreenberg.com/2024/11/trusting-the-science/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 16 Jan 2025 11:27:08 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=7.0</generator>
	<item>
		<title>
		By: David Harold Chester		</title>
		<link>https://www.spencergreenberg.com/2024/11/trusting-the-science/#comment-48294</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[David Harold Chester]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 Jan 2025 11:27:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.spencergreenberg.com/?p=4249#comment-48294</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Science has become a word that is applied to a lot of writings that are strictly not really science at all. To be true science we need to apply the criterion know as Occam&#039;s Razor to what it claims. This idea was more recently better described by Professor Einstein, as being most successful science when it is expressed in the most simple and concise way that is possible. 

We should also be aware that the way any particular science develops is as follows:
1.  Observe a new phenomenon and define it.
2. Describe the phenomenon and provide a possible hypotheses or theory to explain it.
3. Design an experiment that will confirm or deny this explanation.
4. If the hypothesis is unsatisfactory, repeat this process from 2.
5. If the hypothesis is satisfactory it is acceptable to call it a new science.

In view of this we can determine when a proposed idea really becomes a true science and when it is simply a bright idea that may lead the way to either true or pseudo-science.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Science has become a word that is applied to a lot of writings that are strictly not really science at all. To be true science we need to apply the criterion know as Occam&#8217;s Razor to what it claims. This idea was more recently better described by Professor Einstein, as being most successful science when it is expressed in the most simple and concise way that is possible. </p>
<p>We should also be aware that the way any particular science develops is as follows:<br />
1.  Observe a new phenomenon and define it.<br />
2. Describe the phenomenon and provide a possible hypotheses or theory to explain it.<br />
3. Design an experiment that will confirm or deny this explanation.<br />
4. If the hypothesis is unsatisfactory, repeat this process from 2.<br />
5. If the hypothesis is satisfactory it is acceptable to call it a new science.</p>
<p>In view of this we can determine when a proposed idea really becomes a true science and when it is simply a bright idea that may lead the way to either true or pseudo-science.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
