yeah, but the scientific method doesn't have any substantiating prerequisite. I mean, it's just a procedure. The resolution you are yielded could be "yeah we don't have enough conclusive data to be able to generalize and say that different moon cycles of different planets associate themselves with the person who is born on the corresponding month in that their behavior is reflected on the subject depending on if the sun hits it or not" or whatever absurdity you can come up with, that wasn't that great i am sorry. I'm sleepy haha. Anyway, so they used the method but it didn't prove anything, but they received results....so it's still science if you choose the scientific method as the deciding factor. I don't like that standard. I think the scientific procedure's applicability to be used to other non science things such as any sort of research really makes it nothing more than a semantic truth. "Scientific" Method....psh, it's just a name....and just a method.
__________________
Long messages do not equal aggravation of any sort,
rather they reflect nothing more than a response of insight
that should always be read in a matter-of-fact tone.
"Those womyn that seek equality with men, lack determination."
"I beseech you, in the bowels of Christ, think it possible you may be wrong."
-Cromwell
|