vutpakdi, on Apr 16 2008, 08:37 PM, said:
Telling someone, "you go try it out experimentally and decide what to do from there" isn't terribly helpful to most folks in most situations.
It's not that hard to do some objective scientific testing and report the results without bias - and considering that online forums are to facilitate learning, it's pretty important. I'm not saying "just go and experiment and then see what works", I'm saying that ideally, valid experimental data is better to base a decision on than heresay, and those who make the effort to provide such data shouldn't be ridiculed for it, which is waht got the conversation on this tangent in the first place.
vutpakdi, on Apr 16 2008, 08:37 PM, said:
I suggest caution about judging folks so harshly. It is very easy to get a very skewed if not outright incorrect, opinion of who someone is based on a very limited set of data
Earlier this week someone suggested on space.com that since diesel fuel works so well in his wife's truck, it should be used to power moon rovers. I also see people continue to repeat that evolution violates the second law of thermodynamics, which tells me they understand neither evolution nor thermodynamics, or even how science works - believe it or not, people with PhDs in biology understand high school-level physics. So, yeah, sometimes it is easy to judge the critical decision-making skills or science background someone possesses based on outrageous statements such as this.
Reality TV is mostly editing, and considering that there is sometimes a fair amount of money involved for a short period of work, I wouldn't hold that against anybody. As you say, they have no control over what is presented, which is forgotten a couple of weeks after the show anyway.

Sign In
Register
Help


MultiQuote