45
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 480:
Line 480: − +
Talk:Counterexamples to Relativity (view source)
Revision as of 06:23, November 13, 2011
, 06:23, November 13, 2011→At first glance
"by starting with an ''ad hominem'' attack"
"by starting with an ''ad hominem'' attack"
Stating the obvious is not an ad hominem attack. Anyone who (honestly) thinks that because "devices" have not been engineered based upon a scientific theory somehow falsifies that theory is truely clueless (maybe ignorant would be a better word) of science and the scientific method.
Stating the obvious is not an ad hominem attack. I didn't say the author was an "idiot". Anyone who honestly thinks that because "devices" have not been engineered based upon a scientific theory somehow ''falsifies'' that theory ''is'' truly clueless (maybe ignorant would have been a better word) of science and the scientific method. A correct scientific theory must explain previous observations and correctly predict those to come. No where is there a requirement that it lead to engineered "devices".
"The action-at-a-distance by Jesus"
"The action-at-a-distance by Jesus"