From: detect@newsguy.com   
      
   On Friday, July 6, 2018 at 6:38:32 PM UTC-5, Tom Roberts wrote:   
   > On 7/3/18 1:34 PM, Ed Lake wrote:   
   > > If you set down a rule that you cannot tell what is correct and what   
   > > is incorrect, what is the point?  Science and physics is about   
   > > determining what is correct and what is incorrect.   
   >   
   > To see the absurdity of your claims, just unwind your VERY UNUSUAL AND   
   > OUTRAGEOUS meaning of "correct":   
   >   
   >      Ed Lake said: If you set down a rule that you cannot tell what   
   >      is consistent with the laws of physics and what is inconsistent   
   >      with the laws of physics, what is the point?   
   >   
   > It OUGHT to be clear that NOTHING we observe can be inconsistent with   
   > the laws of physics -- we and any physical process we observe are   
   > necessarily constrained by those laws. I did not "set down a rule" that   
   > is not already contained in the phrase "laws of physics".   
   >   
   >      Ed Lake said: Science and physics is [sic] about determining   
   >      what is consistent with the laws of physics and what is   
   >      inconsistent with the laws of physics.   
   >   
   > The absurdity of this is manifest -- EVERYTHING we observe is consistent   
   > with the laws of physics, there is no possibility of "determining".   
   >   
   > 	[Note also that everything we observe is correct (standard   
   > 	 meaning) -- it simply is not possible to make incorrect   
   > 	 observations. It is possible to interpret observations   
   > 	 incorrectly, and when that happens competent scientists   
   > 	 fix the error.]   
      
   < snip > more of the same.   
      
   So, if the world appears flat, then it is flat - because it is what   
   we observe?  And if it appears that the sun goes around the earth,   
   then that must be correct because it is what we observe?  And if   
   the earth beneath our feet appears motionless, then it must be so   
   - because "it simply is not possible to make incorrect observations"?   
      
   Hmm.  Then what is the purpose of science?  I thought it was to   
   explain inconsistencies in observations.  The earth appears flat,   
   yet ships somehow disappear over the horizon.  The sun appears to   
   go around the earth, but observations of other planets indicate   
   they orbit around the sun.  The earth beneath my feet feels motionless,   
   but if I am inside a vehicle moving at a constant rate, the floor   
   beneath my feet also feels motionless, even though I know I am   
   moving.   
      
   All those inconsistencies can be resolved by understanding the laws   
   of physics.  Gravity enables a spherical world to APPEAR locally   
   flat.  The sun is vastly larger than the earth, thus its greater   
   gravity requires that the earth orbit around the sun.  The earth   
   beneath my feet feels motionless ("stationary") because the earth   
   and I are moving in unison in the same direction at the same speed.   
      
   A stone dropped from a moving train cannot drop straight down because   
   inertia will cause it to move with the train until gravity stops   
   it.  The observation that the stone fell straight down was "incorrect"   
   because it was inconsistent with the laws of physics.  When you   
   understand how events can APPEAR inconsistent with the laws of   
   physics while still obeying the laws of physics, then all observers   
   can agree on what actually happened.   
      
   Ed   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)