Raptors Forum | Toronto Raptors Forums & Message Boards - View Single Post - RF Election!
Thread: RF Election!
View Single Post
Old 04-16-2011, 03:41 PM   #119 (permalink)
effin' ineffable

In the Paint
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Toronto
Posts: 30,070

Originally Posted by Ligeia View Post
And yet, it could very well be a coincidence. You have a sample size of one with no controls whatsoever. I think you over-estimate your ability to discern causal relationships.

But did or did not the chiropractor alleviate the symptoms? You can't say that they were cured, and then get upset if someone claims that it is a cure. Either they work and should be included in all medicine more broadly, or they are pseudoscience placebos. I lean towards the latter.
No controls whatsoever? I think numerous tests that show no signs of any problems is significant. And my dog was not cured. She did not have any need of a cure. She needed to have a physical injury that led to other problems corrected. Note the process. Everything else was ruled out. As with my wife's pain. Nobody went running to alternative medicine looking for a solution before seeking extensive testing and medical opinions. And the doctors and vet advised us to go ahead with chiropractic treatment. If these things represent hating science, then I'm very confused.

Originally Posted by Ligeia View Post
I'm sorry, I don't really see how science has failed you in that respect. Science tends to avoid saying things that it doesn't know. For example, science has no plan to "take the overall health of the planet into consideration" because it is simply impossible for us to do so. Still, when you look at the areas where we're discussing future ecological plans, how are we getting informed? Through science. The most notable examples here are climate change, fisheries, and biodiversity.

If you can tell me how to generate the power we need without raising CO^2 emissions after phasing out every single nuclear generator, then you can tell me that it has a modicum of scientific reasoning behind it. As I (and Larry Moran) said, there are some good arguments against nuclear power but the idea that it's an open-and-shut case is laughable.
I think you help me make the point I intended to make here. There are limits to the ability of science to make the decisions that govern us. Certainly science informs, but there are value judgments that need to be made. One value judgment concerning nuclear energy is that it opens us up to enormous problems for future generations, thus making it an open and shut case for some people. I don't take that extreme position myself, but I find it troubling that such a position can not be taken without being accused of "hating science". And I do think that if not science itself, that some body of decision-making abilities needs to be able to limit scientific progress going forward. Not all science has been beneficial. And the powers that it might be able to unleash in the future could prove fatal to life on this planet within my lifetime. Putting all my faith in the ability of science to inform me of the problems that science has caused, when it might be too late, doesn't exactly warm my heart. There has to be some room for some attempt at forethought without being chastised.
LX is offline   Boss Key Wife Key