[lbo-talk] climate change denial

Eubulides paraconsistent at comcast.net
Sat Aug 11 21:54:55 PDT 2007


----- Original Message ----- From: "Dennis Claxton" <ddclaxton at earthlink.net>

You're dodging again. This isn't the same as your paraphrase "he thought its inconsistencies were a sign of being incomplete."

=============

It's trivially the case that scientific theories are incomplete.

GTR recently came in at 99.995% consistent with astrophysical data post-Hubble yada yada.

Yes, it was several data anomalies several decimal places out that led to the overthrow of lots of Newtonian-LaPlacean models; but as Paul Churchland, Patrick Grim, Nicholas Rescher and others have noted, the idea of a final, complete scientific theory is incoherent. Heartfield and his ilk want a perfection from science it cannot grant. Hell, by Heartfield's ramblings on this thread, science isn't even possible.

Ian



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list