quote:
Other things that are considered science, such as conclusions about what happened millions of years ago, or what's going on hundreds or thousands of light years away, the scientific method can only vaguely, or partially be applied. Little more than the sense of sight, for example, can be used to come to conclusions about space exploration.
The scientific method is not 'vaguely' or 'partially' applied. The scientific method is a logical idea regarding the necessity of evidence to constrain knowledge of the structure or behavior of things. You are conflating this with the availability of tools to acquire the data necessary to do this task. Regardless of the thing studied--whether supernova, interatomic forces, or Archean plate tectonics--the logic of scientific appraisal is the same.
I am not sure you fully appreciate the fact that science operates on (tries to say something about) what is unknown, not what is known. The collection of things which we can say are known from observation allow us to do science, but these things are not really what scientists are most interested in.
Edited by TrueCreation, : No reason given.
™ Version 4.2
(1)
