Quotes About Validity

Pseudoscience describes theories that sound like science but are actually just made up, like aromatherapy or biorhythms or love.

In science, if an idea is not falsifiable, it is not that it is wrong, it is that we cannot determine if it is wrong, and thus it is not even wrong.

One should avoid carrying out an experiment requiring more than 10 per cent accuracy.

Real science is all about critically appraising the evidence for somebody else's position.

You might say that science operates pragmatically and religion by divine guidance. If valid, they would reach the same conclusions but science would take a lot longer.

Ethical axioms are found and tested not very differently from the axioms of science. Truth is what stands the test of experience.

Quality without science and research is absurd. You can't make inferences that something works when you have 60 percent missing data.

Why, then, do I continue to claim that creationism isn't science? Simply because these relatively few statements have been tested and conclusively refuted.

Physical science is like simple addition: it is either infallible or it is false.

I think science is real.

Nothing is more irredeemably irrelevant than bad science.

Even if ninety-nine percent of what you discover is later proven wrong, it is the one percent that is right that matters.

One may characterize physics as the doctrine of the repeatable, be it a succession in time or the co-existence in space. The validity of physical theorems is founded on this repeatability.

Are we truly committed to the notion that ideals and values vary and alter in accordance with changing conditions? Should we not question such a relativistic dogma? Is not the degree of our sensitivity to the validity of the ultimate ideals and values that fluctuates rather than the ultimate ideals and values?

if you can say something that is provably false, and no one cares, then you can't have a real debate about anything.

Facts can be most persuasive.

One attempt to avoid the problem of induction involves weakening the demand that scientific knowledge be proven true, and resting content with the claim that scientific claims can be shown to be probably true in the light of the evidence. So the vast number of observations that can be invoked to support the claim that materials denser than air fall diWInwards on earth, although it does not permit us to prove the truth of the claim, does warrant the assertion that the claim is probably true.

A belief in the validity of the acquisition of knowledge and a scientific understanding of the world we live in, the creation and appreciation of aesthetic phenomena in all their many forms, and the broadening and deepening of our range of experiences in day-to-day living, is rapidly becoming the 'religion' of our time.

The limitation of the ethical phenomenon to its place and time does not imply its rejection but, on the contrary, its validation. One does not use canons to shoot sparrows.

Facts are lonely things

Even a North American defense lawyer is right sometimes," Aguilar says. "Like a broken clock, twice a day.

Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?

It does bear emphasis that slippery-slope arguments are notoriously invalid.

The converse truth is that love gives validity to my actions and makes them acceptable to God. I