74e8ef6a   
   XPost: alt.philosophy, talk.philosophy.misc, alt.atheism   
   XPost: alt.christnet   
   From: always@ask.questions   
      
   On 25/12/2012 4:03 AM, Immortalist wrote:   
      
   > In science the null hypothesis or default theory is just a way to   
   > start from scratch and then see what the evidence supports. Its a way   
   > to avoid dogmatic bias.   
      
      
   won't that be out of the frying pan, into the fire?   
      
   if the null hypothesis is not rejected, does that mean that   
   the null hypothesis is true?   
      
   worse still, if the null hypothesis is accepted at x% level   
   of significance, do we know the actual probability that it   
   is mistaken?   
      
   [ Remember: Just answer the damn question, not the questioner!  Don't   
   presume. ]   
      
   --   
   I ask, becos I'm curious.   
      
   Just answer the damn question, not the questioner!  Don't   
   presume.  My personal matters/beliefs are none of your   
   business.  I ask, you answer.  If you think my questions   
   are stupid, you have already proven that you are stupid,   
   not me.  If you don't know the answer, can you please   
   "pass" to more capable person(s) to answer?   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)