stevestory
Posts: 13407 Joined: Oct. 2005
|
Quote (Texas Teach @ Aug. 07 2014,20:39) | Quote (stevestory @ Aug. 07 2014,19:01) | gordon davisson:
Quote | Take the 98% similarity figure as an example: one of the basic principles of science is that you must follow the evidence. If the evidence supports the 98% figure, and that conflicts with your intuition, then you either have to throw that intuition into the trash bin, or stop claiming to be doing science. |
Dense O'Leary:
Quote | No. Absolutely not.
One should never discard intuitions formed from experience, especially about vast claims. Chimpanzees are so obviously unlike humans – in any way that matters – that claimed huge similarities only cast doubt on genetic science.
Genetic science is likely generally true but needs to be reformed and put in better, more realistic, less theory-laden hands.
In any event, today, vast corruption reigns in science findings. There is no reason to believe anything that contradicts carefully considered experience, simply because the claim appeared in a science journal. |
Who cares about supposed scientific 'fact'? I feel like it's wrong!
linky |
I'd be very interested to know how much experience Dense has with actual chimps. I vaguely recall our old chew toy AFDave admitting to not really knowing anything about chimps after make all sorts of claims of dissimilarity. I won't claim to be an expert, but I've actually tagged along with my wife's classes to a chimpanzee retirement center to do observational research, and you simply can't make those kind of claims after really watching chimps. |
I've got a long boring story about a trip to the ashboro zoo and a teenage male chimp perceiving me as a competitor and trying to drive me off, but not the elementary school kids surrounding me.
In short, the chimp was better at telling we were related, than Dense O'Leary is.
|