Okay, I’m still behind on some things, but am making progress. My sister did finally call and so far, no complications and they can now manage with only the allotted therapy and themselves.

Completing changing topics though as I touch a bit on something that can be controversial. As I have explained, I mostly stay away from these topics, but I read something a few minutes ago that is too good an illustration of what I consider to be an important point. The Scientific Method was developed more than three hundred years ago in order to have an objective means of determining how things work. Essentially, develop a hypothesis, test the hypothesis, prove or disprove the hypothesis. If discovery during the process provides additional information, refine the hypothesis and start over.

When properly followed, this is a valid, objective method. It, however, is like most things humans are involved in. Real science is hard and often takes a long time. Once money is at stake or someone is impatient, shortcuts are tempting. Which brings me to my point of the term, “settled science”. There is little accuracy to that term. There is accepted science and again, this should mean science that has been adequately proven, especially against testing done by opposing views who ultimately agree. Now comes the “kicker” I am referencing. For hundreds of years the Shroud of Turin was accepted as a Holy Relic. Then came doubters who wanted to approach it from real science rather than religion. Lots of debates and in the late 1980s, carbon dating – valid science – indicated the cloth was from the Middle Ages, not 2,000+ years old. However, debate still continued and in testing recently released, techniques that did not exist in the 1980s has now validated the cloth is consistent with being 2,000+ years old.

Advances in technology constantly occur and conflicting data must be either resolved or something accepted as theory rather than proof. Now, in the practical world, there are times decisions must be made based on what is the best data available. However, once again, when conflicting recommendations are presented decision-makers need to be aware recommendations may be driven by non-scientific, but very real factors such as personal profit, be that money, reputation, etc.