On 11-3-2017 9:52, Stephen wrote:
> On 3/11/2017 7:56 AM, Thomas de Groot wrote:
>> I am only online a couple of hours each day, so most of the discussion
>> is bypassing me so to speak.
>>
>> Just to resume a few catch words that are dropped here: when speaking
>> about science, terms of 'faith', 'believe', and such are irrelevant.
>> Science is not a faith nor a believe; like a former colleague used to
>> say: "models are to be used, not believed". I am afraid that many people
>> think that 'science' is a kind of 'faith', which it is emphatically not.
>> In short, I tend to avoid that kind of discussions. Other wise, I agree
>> with what Stephen said earlier.
>>
> Science, for some, has become another form of religion. They might not
> understand the details but they have "Faith". It is probably one of the
> reasons that Mr Trump is able to "rubbish" experts. A lot of people are
> loosing their faith. For lots of reasons.

:-/ We are living in sad times...

>
>> About "scientific" polling, I have not the slightest idea what that
>> could be. In my view, polling is the application of statistical models
>> based on assumptions and applied on what humans are thought to think ;-)
>> I have never taken a serious look at any polling results in my life
>>
> If it has any meaning. I think it is modern American usage.

In that case I am at a loss about its meaning.

>
>> Oh I forgot: "Do you eat junk food or charred meat? Watch
>> television within 1/2 hour of bedtime? Drink soda? Buy lottery tickets?"
>>
>> The answers are: no, no, no, no, and no. :-)
>
> But I bet you eat old cheese. ;-)

Aahh... You got me there! Although it is not my favourite anymore I confess.

And I drink tea, coffee, wine, and appreciate a dram of that Scottish 
beverage you probably have heard rumours about. That about resumes my 
usual liquid intakes I guess. ;-)

[no beer. No sir. I don't /really/ like that.]

-- 
Thomas

Post a reply to this message