Originally posted by Dowding
Theoretical science must eventually be able to explain observable phenomena. It has to be supported by empirical data to be validated. As new data becomes available, a particular theory may be discarded or further validated or modified.
This is a constant, organic process. This is science.
I'm not really sure who you are aiming this at.
Go back and read what you posted in response to Laz. Here I'll simply paste it here.
"Your science" has to based on what has already happened. All science works that way."
If there is no way to make an observation, is it still science to be investigating a theoretical concept, even mathematically? If it has not happened yet and you are trying to make it happen or just thinking about it, is it still science while you are making the attempt?
Going back to what I said earlier, I believe there is more than simple observation and that the deductive is as applicable to science as the mere observation and description of a phenomenon. No major big deal. If you disagree that's fine.
As to the good vs bad issue. I thought it was pretty self explanatory. No value judgements over a scientific observation. You did read the title of the thread didn't you?
FWIW nothing I posted was meant as a dig or sarcasm but a participation of the discussion. If you chose to take it negatively that way it's something you need to deal with.
