George Deutsch, Up and Coming PAO Politico

NASA Watch, NY Times ^

[orionblamblam]

> Stem cells, the hockey stick phenomenon, the whole alchemical enterprise is squeaky clean.

Unlike theology, when there's error or fraud in science it's self-correcting.

[AmishDude]

Unlike theology, when there's error or fraud in science it's self-correcting.

Please, for every criminal you catch, 10 go free.

Just make sure your results aren't too groundbreaking and keep the money train a-rollin' along.

[AmishDude]

Sorry. It showed Newtonian mechanics doesn't work in all instances. It is, in fact, "off" in the macroscopic world as well. We just don't notice because we can't measure that precisely.

[orionblamblam]

> It showed Newtonian mechanics doesn't work in all instances.

Indeed. Which is a phenomenally different thing from proving it "wrong."

[orionblamblam]

> Please, for every criminal you catch, 10 go free.

And in theology... that one criminal never gets caught at all, thus all eleven go free.

It's amusing that you think the reason why people get into science is for money. Haw! Next you'll say it's for all the hot chicks, too.

[AmishDude]

That means it is incorrect. It is like defining a curve by its tangent line. The curve is not the tangent line (in general), but if you are close enough to the intersection, you can't effectively measure the difference.

Newton is wrong -- even with steel balls being dropped from buildings, he's wrong, there are relativistic effects -- but it's good enough for government work, you just ignore these small-order terms.

It's amazing how few scientists know the limits of science and the sheer hackery of the whole enterprise.

[orionblamblam]

> That means it is incorrect.

No, it doesn't. It is inadequate at higher energy levels. But for anything most of the world is ever likely to to, it is perfectly accurate.

> It's amazing how few scientists know the limits of science and the sheer hackery of the whole enterprise.

Hmm. So... science is "sheer hackery." But superstition... why, that's revealed Truth!

[AmishDude]

It is inadequate at higher energy levels.

No, it is inadequate at all energy levels. It's just good enough for your cheap, first decimal point approximations. If you want to know what is really going on in the system, you'll have to think a little harder.

Now you can continue in your ignorance, getting results that are good enough, but you will (a) never know what is really going on and (b) be flummoxed when a more complicated system frustrates your model.

[orionblamblam]

Interesting that you put so much faith in "hackery." How do you know the high-energy physicists aren't just lying to you to get more grants?

[AmishDude]

Oh, I don't. But I kinda figured when they started with the whole "normal force" nonsense that Newtonian mechanics had its limits. But even then, the high-energy physicists are just taking a guess at a model that seems to work kinda well.

For now.

[sayfer bullets]

"Theory" is optional when argument against providence is made possible through rhetorical application.

[Matchett-PI]

Thanks for the info. I'll check it out.

[blowfish]

Not exactly: "... The Big Bang is "not proven fact; it is opinion," Mr. Deutsch wrote, adding, "It is not NASA's place, nor should it be to make a declaration such as this about the existence of the universe that discounts intelligent design by a creator."

Is this what we're reduced to? Pathetic clowns like this running NASA?
Next we'll get a head of the Department of Health railing against the unproven theory of infection by microorganisms, demanding equal time for the 'evil humors' theory.

[orionblamblam]

> Pathetic clowns like this running NASA?

Fortuantely, this particular clown wasn't running NASA... he was just the public face of NASA. That's *so* much better.