From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,5cb36983754f64da X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2004-04-26 08:54:27 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!news.glorb.com!news.moat.net!border1.nntp.sjc.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!local1.nntp.sjc.giganews.com!nntp.gbronline.com!news.gbronline.com.POSTED!not-for-mail NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 26 Apr 2004 10:54:25 -0500 Date: Mon, 26 Apr 2004 10:54:41 -0500 From: Wes Groleau Reply-To: groleau+news@freeshell.org Organization: Ain't no organization here! User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.5 (Macintosh/20040208) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: No call for Ada (was Re: Announcing new scripting/prototyping language) References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <-5Odna5ksf0vrRDdRVn-gQ@gbronline.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: 69.9.86.78 X-Trace: sv3-xbBPH1BHEfmjViFe+rasPnyRBvl1DPsXVLEkOtfdn5Q3TGgB4qaOWTy1YXNypUoGLk6qpVIv1RvTPBY!Tgtmt6pSIs4q87BUXtLdZ3JYAbF/4AYARl5QnUBPCsodBpctBKZTKWvRyllgehH2j1g+mbq3e50U X-Complaints-To: abuse@gbronline.com X-DMCA-Complaints-To: abuse@gbronline.com X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly X-Postfilter: 1.1 Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:7508 Date: 2004-04-26T10:54:41-05:00 List-Id: Dmitry A. Kazakov wrote: > On Sat, 24 Apr 2004 05:28:52 +0400 (MSD), "Alexander E. Kopilovich" > wrote: > >>Dmitry A. Kazakov wrote: >>>Science deals with facts. >> >>Science traditionally deals with observations, theories, notations and >>methods of argumentation. > > ... based on facts No. Good science deduces or induces opinions that are "probably true" based on observations and measurements. Bad science (and there is far too much of it) forms an opinion and tries hard to collect observations and measurements to persuade people that it's true. Really bad science, instead of collecting observations and measurements, invents them. And sometimes accuses the good science of being lies. -- Wes Groleau http://freepages.rootsweb.com/~wgroleau/Wes