Talk:Scientific fact

From WikiSynergy

Purple, this is your entry so I will not attempt to change it without discussion. I think it is one of those articles that should probably be in a glossary of terms. I have never heard a scientist use "fact" without some qualifier, event to say "you know what I mean ... well established view."

Actually, this is one of those things that, if you don't use this term, you don't have to explain it. You could substitute it with "accepted views" and be more correct.

You might also say: Following accepted methods of science, there is no such thing as a "scientific fact." Instead, there are information states which are used to permit examination of a hypothesis:

Assumptions: Initial state of a system such as "For the sake of discussion, I will assume that the sun will rise in the morning." An assumption is used to prepare the initial condition of a system of forces and objects to which a hypothesis applies.

Given: Description of the elements of a system based on the assumptions. (Given: an initial earth as... Given: a current earth as...) It doe snot matter if the givens are accepted. The person is expected to examine the logic based on the initial conditions.

Consensus View: The community of concerned people agree on a state of the art for the subject. For instance, The community agrees that there is a difference between the initial formation of earth and its current state. How that change occurred may remain a question. Tom Butler 16:47, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Yes, but I have seen it argued by skeptics that there are such things as scientific facts, so I wanted to properly define exactly in what sense one can use the term. Please do not hesitate to improve the article. P^uR^{ple scissor}ʇɐןʞ 04:42, 17 August 2009 (UTC)