Tag Archives: scientific method

Apr 20 2016

Consensus Is Part of the Scientific Method

This article was originally posted on RealClearScience.

A recent study concluded that the consensus on climate change is real. As stories like this usually do, it provoked a lot of outraged commentary. One of our Facebook commenters, however, responded with a perfectly legitimate question: “And how does consensus fit into the Scientific Method?”

This question, or something very similar to it, is always asked when the issue of scientific consensus is raised. Yet, it might surprise the commenter to learn that scientific consensus is real, and is even a vital part of the scientific method!

I like to imagine the scientific method as resembling the solar system. The planets, traveling in perfect orbits, represent the pillars of the scientific method: Observations, hypotheses, predictions/experiments, and continuous refinements. Continue reading →

Nov 3 2015

Why Psychology and Statistics Are Not Science

This article was originally posted on RealClearScience.

A few years ago, I caused considerable weeping and gnashing of teeth among psychologists for a piece I wrote explaining why psychology isn’t science. It was predicated upon a lengthier argument, which I co-authored with physicist Tom Hartsfield, on the difference between science and non-science. RCS Editor Ross Pomeroy followed up with his own haymaker, explaining why Sigmund Freud’s ideas — from penis envy to psychoanalysis — were not just whacky but unscientific and wrong. Continue reading →

Sep 8 2014

Is Anything Certain in Science?

This article was originally posted on RealClearScience.

Last week, I was at a coffee shop working when a lady approached me and invited me to attend a science discussion group. The topic was the “limits of science.” Intrigued, I put away my laptop and joined the group, which consisted mainly of elderly people who were thoughtful, well-spoken, and seemingly intelligent. I had no idea what to expect in terms of the tone of the conversation, so I listened eagerly as the discussion leader (who has a master’s degree in geology) started the meeting.

“Science is subjective, though we like to think of it as objective,” he began. “When I speak of ‘facts,’ I put them in quotation marks.” He elaborated that things we once thought to be true were later overturned by further study.

Right away, I knew I was going to be in for a ride. While the geologist didn’t clarify exactly what he meant, we can deduce one of two things: Either (1) he does not believe facts are real or (2) he believes facts are not accessible to scientific investigation. Continue reading →