Errr, most science works by making hypotheses and then doing the research to confirm or deny. But maybe you could tell the archeologists they are doing science all wrong, I'm sure they'll listen to you.
This. When working with hypotheses, Scientists throw out ll kind of ideas. They even throw out wild-ass guesses, or WAGS. Then you discuss and try to tear all of them apart. You pick the remaining possibilities, and take them from there.
And it's a pity, because the winnowing process is fun. And if new data comes, it starts all over again.
Science journalists like headlines like "Scientists stunned by" (fill in whatever they are stunned by) while in fact, they are excited.
And seemingly, most people don't like it when they change the script. We've seen recent examples of that in some fields.
The missing "rock" is a fascinating issue. One of the most fascinating parts is that we're still trying to figure it out.
Re: *puts up hands* Now hear me out (Score:5, Informative)
Errr, most science works by making hypotheses and then doing the research to confirm or deny. But maybe you could tell the archeologists they are doing science all wrong, I'm sure they'll listen to you.
This. When working with hypotheses, Scientists throw out ll kind of ideas. They even throw out wild-ass guesses, or WAGS. Then you discuss and try to tear all of them apart. You pick the remaining possibilities, and take them from there.
And it's a pity, because the winnowing process is fun. And if new data comes, it starts all over again.
Science journalists like headlines like "Scientists stunned by" (fill in whatever they are stunned by) while in fact, they are excited.
And seemingly, most people don't like it when they change the script. We've seen recent examples of that in some fields.
The missing "rock" is a fascinating issue. One of the most fascinating parts is that we're still trying to figure it out.