[ Contents | Search | Post | Reply | Next | Previous | Up ]
From: Tom
Date: 03 Oct 2009
Time: 02:28:02 -0500
Remote Name: 91.148.89.192
It's often said that "Not a science if you can't measure it Not a science if you can't replicate the results". But it is too simplistic. So does this mean that Darwinian evolution from the first self-replicating DNA to us is NOT science because we cannot replicate Darwinian evolution by experiment? The same for the cosmic evolution from big bang to star formations? How about ethics that forbids us replication? We have the example of the Lidcombe trials. They had to abandon the control group because it was not ethical due to the (wrongly judged in my view) success of the treatment group. Can we ever repeat a random control trial for early childhood intervention? No, because of ethical concerns. Even though it has not been proving yet because there has been no replication. Of course, ideally scientific methods of replication and measurement should be used, but sometimes it is not possible which does not make it unscientific in my view.