Replies

A2,
In spite of your terrific ability to do google searches your lack of education still seems to haunt you. IF there were no fundamental scientific fact such as the properties and strength of materials it would be next to impossible to build anything but the simplest structures. Even the ancients knew the strength of their materials and when they went beyond their knowledge or simply extrapolated they met with serious disasters such as the collapse of Colossus.

Since you do not have a scientific background then it is easy to understand why you look at science as philosophical instead of purposeful. Scientific facts such as how disease is spread, the effects of sound waves on aircraft approaching the speed of sound, impurities in metals and on and on have allowed you to live that the life you lead and even allow you to try and communicate your hair brained philosophical nonsense to anyone willing to listen. That philosophical nonsense being in part your wacky notion that there are no scientific facts and that there is something worthwhile about your nutty crusade against the mythical “Holy Warriors”.

So then answer the question. Are you the same person who formerly posted as Aric2000? Yes or no? Is that too tough a question?
Honest Truly Regards,
Boiler Plate

Please see #421, and then the post above, perhaps you can convince me as you are so convinced?

Show me where, within the realms of natural science, real science, not laymans science, where the term "scientific facts" has been used by an accredited scientist.

Just once will be enough, more would be better.

And I used Google, because it is one of the search engines that I know anyone has access to, I felt that it would be unfair to use a search engine that you would have unavailable.

Evidence, give me the evidence that would convince me, as strongly as you are convinced.

By the way, I am an engineer, I know exactly what you are talking about, I have to make assumptions that indeed that things are facts.

Ohms law, I take it as fact because it works for me, heat ratios of components etc, amount of power each component will take, how to isolate them and that each component will do exactly what I expect of them, but this not science, this is engineering, a science within itself, I will admit, but it is not natural sciences.

You have missed the point totally, but I don't think that you want to get the point, so we will have to agree to disagree.

Facts are assumptions, based on very good empirical evidence that certain things will occur when you use certain materials etc. And 99.99% of the time, you are right, it's that .01% that is going to come out and bite you. As an engineer, I have to accept those assumptions as facts, but scientists do not. Do you understand the difference? I doubt it, but again, we'll just have to agree to disagree.

As an engineer, I also have a very high respect for Murphy's law. Overengineering is the name of the game, failures can and do happen, it is that .01% that you do your best to fight and design for.