If I go back 5 million years and saw the species that genetically is linked to human beings and chimpanzees, and I made the subjective comment "oh, that looks like a monkey"; in what way shape or form is my comment a scientific fact?
Rather, would it be the hypothesis that we are testing, the genetic link between that monkey looking species, to the human being.
If this test was run, based perhaps on a fossilized animal, a fossilized monkey looking animal, and we were able to confirm that it is indeed a common ancestor,
would it still change the fact that saying it looks like a monkey is not an objective scientific fact, I could say it looks like a horse, so what, or a unicorn or a pony.
The point is, saying something looks like something doesn't make it a scientific fact.
Do you agree with my asssement of the situation. Why or why not.
2006-10-06
03:01:28
·
15 answers
·
asked by
Anonymous