The majority of achievements attributed to science, have little

>>1901316

No, not true experiment. More like tinkering. Building a crude prototype then gradually improving, rather than knowing how things work before building anything.

>>1901320
You can't know how something works until you do experiments and tinker around with it. You think the knowledge just magically appears in your head? It's experiment->knowledge, not knowledge->experiment, because if we already knew how it works, we wouldn't need to do any experiments at all.

>>1901332

Yeah but science has a method. Engineering is more ad hoc. For example Faraday knew what worked but had no real mathematical understanding as to why.

File: ZtMdLYD.jpg (208KB, 2048x1972px) Image search: [Google]

208KB, 2048x1972px

> Real Science was never tried!

>>1901341
He had a observation, which implied a prediction, which was tested, and a preliminary conclusion was reached that allowed for further testing.

Banging rocks together is science if you do it right.

>>1901444

No only liberal arts majors would understand that as science. The only real sciences are non-statistics math, physics, and analytical chemistry. None of which are used in real life.

>>1901448
I'm not sure if you're trying to troll STEMfags or "y cant no nuffink" sophists with this.

>>1901457

I'm just stating true facts.

It's interesting when non scientists think they are scientists. Like the smallpox killed native americans who lacked immunity thing, despite there being no mechanism of how this would work.

>>1901448
> Mathematics
> Real Science
Numbers are invented, not discovered. It is less a science than Elven Language Linguistics.

>>1901465

Well that's a valid point. But at least mathematics is rigorous and pure.

>>1901465
elven language linguistics is a spook
numbers arent