Thread Hijack - "Are you a scientist"

[HoneyRazwell]

Dr Michael Shermer interviews Dr Georgia Purdom at the Creation Museum in Kentucky.

 

This video provides an example of someone holding a college science degree who is not a real scientist; scientific degree doesn’t necessarily equate to scientist. A real scientist:

 

From Univ of Louisville Sciboard:

 

Q. What is a Scientist

 

Ans. Although a person with an advanced degree might claim to be a scientist, the true test of the scientist is how one thinks. A good scientist:

 

Excepts nothing in science absolutely.

Is willing to change his opinions based on new data.

Does not rely on Authority.

Thinks critically.

Knows that extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.

Has an open mind.

Relies on logic and reason.

Knows how to form hypotheses and test them.

Respects the scientific method.

Examines all the data, not just the data that support his or her view.

Builds on the work of others, giving them appropriate credit.

Documents his or her experiments so they can be duplicated by others.

Knows that if a claim is made, the claimant must provide the proof. (It is not up to others to disprove it.)

Is intellectually honest.

 

Thanks,

Jamie Hale

Please stop spreading this misinformation and promoting myths, Jamie Hale. Science educators such as Dr. William McComas, as well as many professional scientists, are fighting to counter this misinformation about science and correct it.

 

There is NO SUCH THING as "The Scientific Method." No such thing exists or ever existed. This is one of the greatest and most pervasive MYTHS about science out there.

 

Science uses THOUSANDS of methods and they are all very different. "The Many Scientific MethodS" or the Many processes of science" are far better expressions.

 

"The Scientific Method" is a disgarce and erroneous garbage. The universal, step by step, common, singular poster version is complete nonsense what we all learn in 7th grade. Little, if ANY, science is conducted this way!

 

There are many people trying to correct this creeping fox terrier" and blatant myth , such as physicist John Denker, who has an excellent article about this travesty. Also, the University of Califfornia at Berkeley has a great article about Science Misconceptions. I talk to MANY noted scientists (such as Michio Kaku and more) and they ALL say unanimously that NO such singular method ever existed and that it is a persistent MYTH. They all unanimously said in their books, as well as to me, that science is rather messy and has NO distinctly defined "method."

 

The Scientific Method needs to be REMOVED from our vocabulary immediately. It is total nonsense and an insult to professional scientists everywhere.

Edited June 28, 2014 by HoneyRazwell

[HoneyRazwell]

Dr Michael Shermer interviews Dr Georgia Purdom at the Creation Museum in Kentucky.

 

This video provides an example of someone holding a college science degree who is not a real scientist; scientific degree doesn’t necessarily equate to scientist. A real scientist:

 

From Univ of Louisville Sciboard:

 

Q. What is a Scientist

 

Ans. Although a person with an advanced degree might claim to be a scientist, the true test of the scientist is how one thinks. A good scientist:

 

Excepts nothing in science absolutely.

Is willing to change his opinions based on new data.

Does not rely on Authority.

Thinks critically.

Knows that extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.

Has an open mind.

Relies on logic and reason.

Knows how to form hypotheses and test them.

Respects the scientific method.

Examines all the data, not just the data that support his or her view.

Builds on the work of others, giving them appropriate credit.

Documents his or her experiments so they can be duplicated by others.

Knows that if a claim is made, the claimant must provide the proof. (It is not up to others to disprove it.)

Is intellectually honest.

 

Thanks,

Jamie Hale

No , Jamie Hale. WRONG.

 

It is you who are misinformed. You are promotimng NONSENSE. I tried PRIVATELY to correct you. Now, I will do it publicly:

 

 

Please educate yourself. Real science educators are trying mightily to correct the misinformation people like yourself are promoting:

 

START HERE:

 

<ad link removed.>

Edited June 29, 2014 by imatfaal

[Ophiolite]

I think Jamie will be comfortably aware that (s)he is not wrong. Other posters have expanded on Jamie's contribution, but - in all the essential parts - agreed with it. I remain open to alternative views: what specifically do you find to be nonsensical about the points raised by Jamie?

 

Do not feel obliged to address each one, but I would welcome the careful analysis, by you, of what constitutes nonsense of at least one of the points. Keep in mind that you need to provide evidence to support your assertion. And further note that evidence is not equivalent to opinion, arm waving, or strawman arguments. (I'm confident you will not use any such devices, since you are aware that they are a) unacceptable on the forum and b) as useful a wet noodle for advancing an argument.)

 

Note: I'd really appreciate it you would minimise the use of capitals, large font and coloured font in your reply. It would help me to take what you say seriously. Occasional emphasis, as I've used in my first paragraph, is welcome.

 

Edit: I should check the ban list before posting. I see HR is no longer a member. Perhaps her first sock puppet will take the time to reply.

Edited June 29, 2014 by Ophiolite

[MikeSanchez]

No , "HoneyRazwell" is correct. It is Jamie Hale who has the equivalent a 6th grade level understandiong of science.. Misinformed people, such as Jamie Hale, are actively and publicly promoting the most persistent and greatest myth of science- that there is such a thing called "The Scientific Method" and that all scientists follow it or must follow it. Nothing could be more wrong.

 

Internet forums and science textbook wroters are creeping fox terries and one of the most egregious promoters of science misinformation!

[Ophiolite]

Hello Mike - would you care to respond to the points I made to HR in post #13. If you are unable, or unwilling to provide specific, evidence based repudiation of Jamie's claims, then your assertions are reduced to the level of opinion.

 

Edit: It seems I just can't keep up with the bans on HR/Mike etc. I shouldn't really give aid to someone trying to break the rules, but the next time you create a sock puppet HR try posting in the guise of someone who understands reason, logic and the value of experiment. It might make you more difficult to detect.

Edited June 29, 2014 by Ophiolite

[chadn737]

If you do not do research or contribute to the knowledge base of science, then you are not really a "scientist" in any sense of the word. There are many who have done research at various points of life, as undergrads, as grad students, etc. However, it doesn't make sense to me that having once been involved in research, if one ceases to be, that they are still as "scientist". If ever I find myself in a position where I leave doing research for a living, then I will cease to call myself a scientist. Its really that simple. Thinking logically and skeptically does not make one anymore a scientist than does growing a garden make one a "farmer" or having run a 5k makes one an "athlete".