>muh science evolves and changes overtimeBut it literally doesn't. The scientific method doesn't change and has never changed
>>17041923Science != the scientific method
>>17041925you cant be this retarded
Did the scientific method not get created at some point? Did life evolve with it?
objective truths of reality don't change but our understanding of them does. the scientific method appears to be our best tool to align our measly human understanding with objective truth
>>17042192If you're conflating science with the scientific method then it is you who eats the glue.
It is exactly like The Bible: God’s final singular word on the subject that we may retranslate into the current vernacular as we see fit.Science is exactly like that. Nature wrote a Book. We scribbled dicks and boobs all over the pages and then got overly excited.
>>17042769>xxxxxx69Nice.
>retard never read kuhn
>>17041923Because there hasn't surfaced anything better, yet.The only standard in science is reproducibility. If you have discovered another method that can produce better result modelling reality, do let us know.
>>17042795>The only standard in science is reproducibility.I can flip coins all day long, frog.How much “data” you need?
>>17042798However much it becomes statistically significant.
