On Monday, 25 December 2017 18:07:14 UTC, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 25/12/17 13:43, Cursitor Doom wrote:
On Mon, 25 Dec 2017 11:57:21 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 25/12/17 11:44, Cursitor Doom wrote:
On Mon, 25 Dec 2017 09:10:43 +0000, Norman Wells wrote:

But it's a philosophical question. And I thought from your name that
you might have an answer.

Natural Philosophy has nowt much to do with philosophy; it's simply the
archaic term for science.

And you think that science has nowt to do with philosophy? How quaint!"


Natural philosophy was the term for science back in Newton's day. I'm
guessing you must surely know that, since it's your adopted moniker.


Nope, science is the modern name for natural philosophy.

It ries to pretend it isnt a branch of philsophy. This leads to huge
mistakes - like 'climate change'

That's a major problem with 'science' today. The experiments are done, the results analysed and p value calculated, but somewhere along the line the illogic of the experimenter completely screwed up, making the conclusions largely worthless.


NT