|
Edited on Wed Mar-07-07 04:28 PM by patrice
various criticism that ammount to: "Your knowledge is relative to its context (i.e. its scientific assumptions and methods). My opposing knowledge is relative to its context (i.e. its scientific assumptions and methods). Since both sets of fact are relative, they are equal, and hence "the jury is still out" on Global Climate Change."
Yes, All knowledge IS, in fact, relative; that does not make it equally valid. Equality is not the necessary consequence of relativity. Peer review enhances the validity of research, by placing the relative context of any given bit of information within the larger frame of reference of the scientific community AND it challenges it within that larger frame.
The discussion of competing knowledge should compare, point by point, the characteristics of the peer reviews of each.
You are doing important work greenbriar, good luck and thank you!
Hare Krsna! Hare Rama!
|