General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: New poll proves that Stupid won the war for American minds. [View all]RoccoR5955
(12,471 posts)Science is based on inductive reasoning, which is a method of drawing generalized conclusions based on finite observations. Inductive reasoning can be used to disprove a theory, but it cannot be used to prove one. for example, take the following observation:
The grass outside my window is green.
Using inductive reasoning I can conclude:
All grass is green.
This conclusion is valid in inductive reasoning so long as all observations support it. As soon as an observation contradicts the conclusion, the conclusion is proved false. However, the only way to prove theory is true would be to observe all grass. This limitation is due to the fact that a conclusion is being drawn from a subset of possible observations.
Since science, by its very nature, attempts to draw conclusions from observations of the natural world inductive reasoning is necessary. In science, though, it is literally impossible to make every possible observation to prove a rule. Therefore, it is also impossible to prove any theory in science. Every conclusion science has ever made is an unproved theory, including gravity.\
I see no inductive reasoning that disproves climate change, the big bang, and the age of the Earth/solar system.