Are all astronomer not great detectives...?

Question

Most astronomers always jump to conclusion about new discoveries.
they see something new in the sky such as a quaser blowing up..lol
or maybe that giant storm on jupiter that's been raging for thousands of years suddenly stop
or maybe they see the same star appear in two different places due to strong gravitational fields from an object that they cannot see.
my opinion is much like sherlock holmes..

"It's a capital mistake to theorize before you have all the evidence."

and astronomers do not have all the evidennce..

SHARON...its your right to feel moany..your a girl..probably gorgeous..
and no reason to feel moany..think with your brain and not with your heart..if you can follow that..

Ok then lets make it a question then..
Are all astronomers not that great at detective work...?
now thats a question..is it not....?

if you look at the caption..its a question not a report...

now please everyone an honest opinion here without childish behaviour..this is a genuine question.
srry to say that some people take it otherwise

as for the space program producing computers rubbish..computers were used during the second world war remember eniac..for starters..this was way beforeman ever thought of putting man on the moon..

Answer 1

So true, but it even happens in everyday life!

Answer 2

Love Holmes, but that is a bad quote.

The very nature of theories is you don't have all the evidence. In fact, to study something, you need to have theories, and you don't study things for which all the evidence is in.

A scientist has a hypothesis. You look at the hypothesis, and try to see what evidence you have to support it. The evidence you find, through study and observation, forms the theory. And you use that theory and what you know to determine what and where to investigate further. And each time around, you get more information, and the theory that started as a general sketch of what is going on slowly becomes a more and more defined picture. And this isn't just with one scientist, but with the whole community - work started by one is worked on by others.

So, when astronomers see something like you mentioned, they're taking all the work that went before them, trying to see how it makes sense within that context. If it is a little out of the ordinary, they guess as to why. Then, they or other scientists will try to see if they can see the same things, if the theory is holding up.

So, Holmes was wrong, for once. Heck, even in his stories, he doesn't follow his own advice - he doesn't walk into a room, and immediately solve the crimes. He talks to people and gathers evidence - and he knows what questions to ask of whom, and what evidence to look for, all based on a theory he already has. He just hasn't told Watson, yet.

Answer 3

> Most astronomers always jump to conclusion about new discoveries.

Umm...Interesting choice of words: "most" and "always". Do you have any evidence to back up this claim?

I do assume that you are basing this on what you actually read in professional astronomy journals, right? Surely you are not basing this assumption on what you read in the local paper or see on TV news. Those are rather unreliable sources if you want to know what astronomers are really doing.

My own experience (based on following astronomy for many years) is that astronomers are very much NOT quick to jump to conclusions. A prime example is the existence of black holes. For many years while I was growing up (before any black holes were actually discovered), the popular story presented by the media was that black holes were a FACT. But if one actually took the trouble to read a full quote from a real astronomer at the time, the astronomer would only say that it's "likely" that black holes exist. So now who's jumping to conclusions?

Before YOU jump to conclusions about what "most astronomers" do, please do your homework first. With just a little research, I predict that you'll find that, behind every "new" astronomy announcement made in the press, there are months and years of careful research that never got reported.

Answer 4

No sientific person on earth, and especially Astronomers has a crystal ball where he could look into it and get all the Answers.
What ever Science predicts is based on theory , assumptions and conclusion of what they observe. Evidence just like in a Court of Law can be violently misinterpreted.
All they are trying to do is Unravel the Mysteries of the Universe that our Creator has set.

Answer 5

1) Do you have some evidence for this assertation?

2) What do you think we should do instead? Wait until the end of time just in case? Do you want the people curing cancer and AIDS to do that too? Wait and see instead of actually work for an answer? That's ridiculous.

3) And I suppose you do? Or you're just complaining about something?

Answer 6

Sharon, if it werent for the space program, you wouldn't have many of the things you do today, including the computer you are currently typing on.

Answer 7

This is a "Report It" question. the asker is expressing personal views not asking a serious question about astronomy.

Answer 8

hate the waste of money that gets spent for astronaughts to go 'up there'..if that money was spent on this planet maybe we'd have less problems..wow! we got teflon!..