WEBVTT - Things We Believed Before the Scientific Method

0:00:00.760 --> 0:00:05.320
<v Speaker 1>Hey, everybody, Chuck here, continuing our journey down the science trail.

0:00:05.960 --> 0:00:07.880
<v Speaker 1>Here we are with I Bleeve, Episode seven on the

0:00:07.880 --> 0:00:14.280
<v Speaker 1>list How the Scientific Method Works. Welcome to Stuff you

0:00:14.320 --> 0:00:22.720
<v Speaker 1>Should Know from HowStuffWorks dot com.

0:00:22.800 --> 0:00:25.720
<v Speaker 2>Hey, and welcome to the podcast. I'm Josh Clark. There's

0:00:25.800 --> 0:00:29.400
<v Speaker 2>Charles W. Chuck Bryant, there's Jerry Stuff you should know.

0:00:29.600 --> 0:00:30.320
<v Speaker 1>Why you grinning?

0:00:30.480 --> 0:00:31.319
<v Speaker 2>It's been a while.

0:00:31.520 --> 0:00:31.800
<v Speaker 1>I know.

0:00:32.400 --> 0:00:35.320
<v Speaker 2>It's funny, Like those words come pouring out of my mouth, didn't.

0:00:35.360 --> 0:00:37.400
<v Speaker 1>It's cool you wake up in the middle of the

0:00:37.440 --> 0:00:39.320
<v Speaker 1>night saying that and give me like slugged you in

0:00:39.320 --> 0:00:39.680
<v Speaker 1>the face.

0:00:39.800 --> 0:00:42.760
<v Speaker 2>Right, She's like, go ahead, sleep, she has to dry

0:00:42.800 --> 0:00:43.320
<v Speaker 2>my brow.

0:00:44.159 --> 0:00:48.280
<v Speaker 1>Yes, we pre recorded some for December, as we like

0:00:48.320 --> 0:00:49.640
<v Speaker 1>to do to take a little time off at the

0:00:49.680 --> 0:00:52.800
<v Speaker 1>end of the year and not explain things for a

0:00:52.800 --> 0:00:55.600
<v Speaker 1>few weeks in our real lives. It's nice, like people

0:00:55.640 --> 0:00:56.120
<v Speaker 1>ask me.

0:00:56.120 --> 0:00:58.560
<v Speaker 2>Things like what happened to that stick of butter?

0:00:58.720 --> 0:01:00.000
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, I don't know, don't act.

0:01:00.120 --> 0:01:00.960
<v Speaker 2>Don't even ask me.

0:01:01.200 --> 0:01:03.920
<v Speaker 1>I could tell you, yeah, but I'm not gonna exactly.

0:01:03.960 --> 0:01:07.880
<v Speaker 1>That's how it goes in my house. Find your own butter, right,

0:01:08.080 --> 0:01:09.680
<v Speaker 1>December was find your Own Butter month.

0:01:09.760 --> 0:01:12.520
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, that's a good's that's a good one.

0:01:12.680 --> 0:01:14.479
<v Speaker 1>That should be a T shirt. Yes, stuff you should

0:01:14.520 --> 0:01:15.640
<v Speaker 1>know find your own butter.

0:01:16.240 --> 0:01:18.720
<v Speaker 2>Or December is find your own Butter month. Yeah that's right.

0:01:18.840 --> 0:01:21.880
<v Speaker 2>Maybe a stick of butter is some Garland on it. Yeah,

0:01:22.080 --> 0:01:22.560
<v Speaker 2>I like that.

0:01:22.920 --> 0:01:24.800
<v Speaker 1>So, uh, it's good to see you again, man, Good

0:01:24.800 --> 0:01:25.520
<v Speaker 1>to be back in here.

0:01:25.600 --> 0:01:27.720
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, it is nice to be back because as much as.

0:01:27.640 --> 0:01:30.360
<v Speaker 1>The break was great, I'm happy to be explaining things again.

0:01:30.480 --> 0:01:32.720
<v Speaker 2>Well that's good because if we got in here and

0:01:32.760 --> 0:01:34.680
<v Speaker 2>you're like, I can't do this, I can't do it again.

0:01:34.560 --> 0:01:35.240
<v Speaker 1>We'd be in trouble.

0:01:35.319 --> 0:01:37.800
<v Speaker 2>Yeah. Yeah, So I'm glad we're all feeling good. Jerry,

0:01:37.840 --> 0:01:40.679
<v Speaker 2>you feeling good. Jerry's got two thumbs up in a

0:01:40.720 --> 0:01:42.800
<v Speaker 2>big goofy smile, two of.

0:01:42.760 --> 0:01:43.520
<v Speaker 1>Her three thumbs.

0:01:44.040 --> 0:01:48.480
<v Speaker 2>She looks like Bob from that male enhancement pill add Oh.

0:01:48.560 --> 0:01:50.840
<v Speaker 1>See the guy, the old man that's like super buff.

0:01:51.880 --> 0:01:53.920
<v Speaker 2>I would call him old. He was middle aged. He

0:01:54.000 --> 0:01:56.760
<v Speaker 2>looked like kind of a Bob Dobbs type of dude.

0:01:56.840 --> 0:01:58.600
<v Speaker 2>I think that's kind of who he was modeled to.

0:01:58.640 --> 0:02:01.240
<v Speaker 1>See the guy that's super muscling. Now, I'm thinking of

0:02:01.320 --> 0:02:01.840
<v Speaker 1>someone different.

0:02:01.920 --> 0:02:03.760
<v Speaker 2>I think are you're thinking of Jack Llane.

0:02:04.000 --> 0:02:05.880
<v Speaker 1>No, no, no, no, just there's some ad. There's some

0:02:05.920 --> 0:02:08.040
<v Speaker 1>old man that looks like really creepy because from the

0:02:08.080 --> 0:02:10.600
<v Speaker 1>next time super like buff he looks like a twenty

0:02:10.600 --> 0:02:11.600
<v Speaker 1>five year old. No.

0:02:11.720 --> 0:02:14.359
<v Speaker 2>Remember, there was like a mail enhancement pill and I'm

0:02:14.360 --> 0:02:15.720
<v Speaker 2>making air quotes here.

0:02:15.800 --> 0:02:16.960
<v Speaker 1>For a rectalle dysfunction.

0:02:17.280 --> 0:02:20.440
<v Speaker 2>Oh well, there go the air quotes. But yes, And

0:02:20.480 --> 0:02:23.560
<v Speaker 2>it was like in the early two thousands. I think,

0:02:23.760 --> 0:02:26.880
<v Speaker 2>uh huh, maybe late nineties, but I think early two thousands,

0:02:26.919 --> 0:02:29.760
<v Speaker 2>and these ads were everywhere, and there was Bob and

0:02:29.840 --> 0:02:32.120
<v Speaker 2>like all these great things happened to him because he

0:02:32.280 --> 0:02:34.440
<v Speaker 2>started taking this pill. I can't remember the name of

0:02:34.480 --> 0:02:37.440
<v Speaker 2>the pill. But the company got into a lot of

0:02:37.480 --> 0:02:41.160
<v Speaker 2>trouble because it was basically like a subscription service and

0:02:41.240 --> 0:02:42.840
<v Speaker 2>like you gave him your credit card and you got

0:02:42.840 --> 0:02:45.360
<v Speaker 2>this free trial, but then they started sending it to

0:02:45.400 --> 0:02:47.800
<v Speaker 2>you and it was like next to impossible to cut

0:02:47.840 --> 0:02:48.520
<v Speaker 2>off service.

0:02:49.080 --> 0:02:49.640
<v Speaker 1>Interesting.

0:02:49.880 --> 0:02:52.120
<v Speaker 2>They were like, no, we want your mailness to be enhanced.

0:02:53.280 --> 0:02:55.679
<v Speaker 2>So you've seen these ads.

0:02:55.720 --> 0:02:59.000
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, I was gonna start asking questions, but why bother.

0:02:59.160 --> 0:03:02.040
<v Speaker 2>I will a YouTube. I will find it on YouTube.

0:03:02.080 --> 0:03:05.359
<v Speaker 2>I'll be like, oh, Bob, yeah you will, You'll go oh,

0:03:05.520 --> 0:03:07.120
<v Speaker 2>I won't have to come back in and record an

0:03:07.160 --> 0:03:08.000
<v Speaker 2>insert right.

0:03:07.880 --> 0:03:09.320
<v Speaker 1>The guy that's in the back of all those pill

0:03:09.360 --> 0:03:12.959
<v Speaker 1>bottles in my bathroom, so chuck.

0:03:13.200 --> 0:03:15.920
<v Speaker 2>Yes, I don't even remember how we got Oh yeah,

0:03:16.040 --> 0:03:19.160
<v Speaker 2>Jerry did that. That was Jerry's fault. But you remember

0:03:19.200 --> 0:03:23.480
<v Speaker 2>we did the Enlightenment episode. Yeah, okay, we talked a

0:03:23.480 --> 0:03:28.280
<v Speaker 2>lot about how there's this kind of tug of war

0:03:28.919 --> 0:03:34.920
<v Speaker 2>over the human psyche, sure, between rationalism and mysticism. I

0:03:34.920 --> 0:03:37.800
<v Speaker 2>guess you could you could put it. Yeah, well, I

0:03:37.840 --> 0:03:40.320
<v Speaker 2>feel like we're talking today about the scientific method.

0:03:40.400 --> 0:03:41.480
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, great idea.

0:03:41.520 --> 0:03:43.520
<v Speaker 2>By the way, thank you very much. It's been a

0:03:43.520 --> 0:03:48.160
<v Speaker 2>long time coming. Yeah, because I realized, like I don't

0:03:48.240 --> 0:03:50.800
<v Speaker 2>understand it as fully as I don't understand science. I

0:03:50.920 --> 0:03:53.440
<v Speaker 2>understand the scientific method because it's pretty cut and dry

0:03:53.480 --> 0:03:56.440
<v Speaker 2>and it's beautiful and elegant and simple. But then you

0:03:56.600 --> 0:03:59.680
<v Speaker 2>just take this thing and it came out of the

0:03:59.720 --> 0:04:02.240
<v Speaker 2>birth rationalism. Yeah, and when you place it into the

0:04:02.240 --> 0:04:06.600
<v Speaker 2>world and make it function, there's a lot of implications. Yeah,

0:04:06.720 --> 0:04:09.560
<v Speaker 2>is it being used properly? Is it being used responsibly?

0:04:09.680 --> 0:04:13.280
<v Speaker 2>Like are we putting what constitutes faith into that? You know,

0:04:13.360 --> 0:04:15.680
<v Speaker 2>like it just raises all this other stuff, and it

0:04:15.720 --> 0:04:18.840
<v Speaker 2>made me realize, like I don't understand science as much

0:04:18.880 --> 0:04:21.280
<v Speaker 2>as I want to, So researching this it was awesome.

0:04:21.640 --> 0:04:24.160
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, and this is a cool episode, I think, because

0:04:24.240 --> 0:04:26.400
<v Speaker 1>not only are we going to talk about the scientific method,

0:04:26.440 --> 0:04:28.920
<v Speaker 1>but we're going to talk about just science, like what

0:04:29.000 --> 0:04:32.560
<v Speaker 1>is science in general? And some of the rock stars

0:04:32.720 --> 0:04:35.839
<v Speaker 1>along the way who really you know, laid out the

0:04:35.880 --> 0:04:40.919
<v Speaker 1>path remarkably and like many many years ago, right like

0:04:40.960 --> 0:04:44.160
<v Speaker 1>coming up with these amazing discoveries that still like hold

0:04:44.800 --> 0:04:46.560
<v Speaker 1>you know, you can like hold their feet to the

0:04:46.600 --> 0:04:47.880
<v Speaker 1>fire for a lot of this stuff.

0:04:48.000 --> 0:04:52.600
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, because if you come upon a universal truth, yeah,

0:04:52.760 --> 0:04:54.599
<v Speaker 2>you know it is what it is, like you got

0:04:54.600 --> 0:04:56.840
<v Speaker 2>to be the person who discovered it because you know,

0:04:56.960 --> 0:04:59.880
<v Speaker 2>you saw it, you realized it a certain way. But

0:05:00.360 --> 0:05:01.679
<v Speaker 2>ultimately he was there already.

0:05:01.800 --> 0:05:03.839
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, like Newton. I mean, we'll talk about all this stuff,

0:05:03.880 --> 0:05:06.559
<v Speaker 1>but it's not like now we're like, oh Newton, most

0:05:06.560 --> 0:05:08.880
<v Speaker 1>of what he said was wrong, But that's understandable because

0:05:08.920 --> 0:05:11.239
<v Speaker 1>it was a long time ago. Like his stuff holds

0:05:11.320 --> 0:05:12.680
<v Speaker 1>up really really well.

0:05:12.760 --> 0:05:15.520
<v Speaker 2>I was wondering if he on his deathbed was just like,

0:05:15.640 --> 0:05:20.440
<v Speaker 2>oh man, I contributed so much to humanity. It's mind boggling.

0:05:20.760 --> 0:05:22.479
<v Speaker 1>But I couldn't enhance my mailhood.

0:05:23.200 --> 0:05:26.800
<v Speaker 2>Well, Bob hadn't come along yet, so check. Let's just

0:05:26.960 --> 0:05:30.800
<v Speaker 2>quit stalling and talk about science, Like what is science?

0:05:31.160 --> 0:05:36.000
<v Speaker 1>Well, I hate the old elementary school defined as but

0:05:36.080 --> 0:05:38.320
<v Speaker 1>it's a pretty good place to start here to get

0:05:38.320 --> 0:05:39.960
<v Speaker 1>a base definition of science.

0:05:40.040 --> 0:05:42.080
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, Old William Harris did a great job with this.

0:05:42.360 --> 0:05:44.560
<v Speaker 1>Yes, William Harris did a great job. Yeah, he did

0:05:45.120 --> 0:05:48.680
<v Speaker 1>science the intellectual and practical activity encompassing the structure and

0:05:48.680 --> 0:05:52.560
<v Speaker 1>behavior of the physical and natural world through observation and experimentation.

0:05:53.040 --> 0:05:54.440
<v Speaker 2>Boom, end of podcast.

0:05:55.480 --> 0:05:58.600
<v Speaker 1>So the first part of that is science is practical

0:05:59.200 --> 0:06:02.240
<v Speaker 1>and it is you know, they make a good he makes.

0:06:02.480 --> 0:06:04.400
<v Speaker 1>Bill Harris makes a great point in here. It's not

0:06:04.600 --> 0:06:07.120
<v Speaker 1>just stuff you do in a lab, and it's not

0:06:07.279 --> 0:06:11.000
<v Speaker 1>just for scientists. It is all about being hands on

0:06:11.120 --> 0:06:14.400
<v Speaker 1>and active, and it's all about discovery and asking questions

0:06:14.800 --> 0:06:18.800
<v Speaker 1>about I mean, that's how everything is ultimately solved, is

0:06:18.839 --> 0:06:21.000
<v Speaker 1>by someone looking at something and having a question about

0:06:21.040 --> 0:06:21.680
<v Speaker 1>it exactly.

0:06:21.920 --> 0:06:24.280
<v Speaker 2>And then the scientific method comes in when you say,

0:06:24.360 --> 0:06:28.440
<v Speaker 2>and this is how you properly get to that answer exactly.

0:06:29.160 --> 0:06:32.520
<v Speaker 2>And he makes another good point too that the idea

0:06:32.560 --> 0:06:35.479
<v Speaker 2>that there is a method, a scientific method makes it

0:06:35.520 --> 0:06:42.000
<v Speaker 2>seem like it's it's secreted away, right, the fraternity of scientists,

0:06:42.040 --> 0:06:44.800
<v Speaker 2>And like you said, anybody can use it. It's this

0:06:44.920 --> 0:06:46.520
<v Speaker 2>kind of part of being a curious human.

0:06:46.839 --> 0:06:49.360
<v Speaker 1>It's not even anyone can use it. Everyone does use

0:06:49.400 --> 0:06:51.440
<v Speaker 1>it nice, you just might not even know that you're

0:06:51.560 --> 0:06:53.880
<v Speaker 1>using it, like if you I mean, one of the

0:06:53.880 --> 0:06:56.320
<v Speaker 1>examples that use later is if like your car overheats,

0:06:56.839 --> 0:06:59.839
<v Speaker 1>when you figure it out why and fix it, that's

0:06:59.839 --> 0:07:02.080
<v Speaker 1>the scientific method, right, playing.

0:07:01.800 --> 0:07:04.159
<v Speaker 2>Out exactly based on reasoning.

0:07:04.600 --> 0:07:07.000
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, okay, in deduction and induction.

0:07:07.360 --> 0:07:09.880
<v Speaker 2>Right man, there's so much to talk about, Okay, So

0:07:09.960 --> 0:07:13.160
<v Speaker 2>let's let's talk about that definition that you had. So

0:07:13.920 --> 0:07:16.280
<v Speaker 2>the first part is is that science is it's a

0:07:16.360 --> 0:07:20.360
<v Speaker 2>practical activity. So science is practical, right, Yeah, it's it's this.

0:07:22.320 --> 0:07:25.720
<v Speaker 2>The basis of the whole thing is discovery. Right. You

0:07:25.760 --> 0:07:28.600
<v Speaker 2>see something, you see birds in flight, and you say,

0:07:28.840 --> 0:07:32.120
<v Speaker 2>where are those birds going? And if you just went

0:07:32.160 --> 0:07:34.160
<v Speaker 2>and laid down on the ground and went to sleep

0:07:34.240 --> 0:07:37.200
<v Speaker 2>after that, then you're not you're not carrying out science.

0:07:37.240 --> 0:07:39.040
<v Speaker 2>But if you went, I want to find out where

0:07:39.040 --> 0:07:41.480
<v Speaker 2>those birds are going, and you follow them and you

0:07:41.520 --> 0:07:44.800
<v Speaker 2>start taking notes. That's that is the basis of science.

0:07:44.800 --> 0:07:45.560
<v Speaker 2>It's discovery.

0:07:45.680 --> 0:07:49.880
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, and that's the observational part as well. Sometimes you're

0:07:50.000 --> 0:07:53.200
<v Speaker 1>using a microscope or a telescope. Sometimes you're using your eyeballs.

0:07:53.720 --> 0:07:56.880
<v Speaker 1>But no matter what your tool is, you're going to

0:07:56.960 --> 0:08:01.720
<v Speaker 1>be watching something and recording what's called data or data,

0:08:01.760 --> 0:08:04.800
<v Speaker 1>depending on I don't know what kind of person you are.

0:08:05.160 --> 0:08:06.480
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, what do you say?

0:08:07.440 --> 0:08:08.280
<v Speaker 1>I think? I say both.

0:08:09.120 --> 0:08:11.680
<v Speaker 2>I think I say data, data. Yeah, I don't think.

0:08:11.680 --> 0:08:14.800
<v Speaker 2>I don't think. I say data, Okay, data, I say

0:08:14.880 --> 0:08:15.520
<v Speaker 2>data data.

0:08:15.640 --> 0:08:17.320
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, all right, we'll go with data.

0:08:17.400 --> 0:08:18.080
<v Speaker 2>You say both.

0:08:18.640 --> 0:08:20.120
<v Speaker 1>I feel like it just comes out of my mouth

0:08:20.160 --> 0:08:21.560
<v Speaker 1>one way or the other, and I don't really think

0:08:21.560 --> 0:08:21.920
<v Speaker 1>about it.

0:08:22.000 --> 0:08:24.119
<v Speaker 2>I think that's like being ambidextrous. Yeah.

0:08:24.240 --> 0:08:28.680
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, I'm a data data Yeah. Uh So once you

0:08:28.880 --> 0:08:31.880
<v Speaker 1>are observing this data, well, there are a couple of kinds.

0:08:32.080 --> 0:08:36.679
<v Speaker 1>There's quantitative data, which are numbers, like you know, your

0:08:36.720 --> 0:08:39.679
<v Speaker 1>body temperature is ninety eight point six. Although I think

0:08:39.679 --> 0:08:41.040
<v Speaker 1>that's changed slightly now, hadn't it.

0:08:41.360 --> 0:08:44.120
<v Speaker 2>Yeah? Yeah, there used to be like, if you were

0:08:44.160 --> 0:08:47.040
<v Speaker 2>a human being, your body temperature is ninety eight point six,

0:08:47.080 --> 0:08:49.080
<v Speaker 2>and then REALI like, no, it's a little more variation

0:08:49.240 --> 0:08:49.480
<v Speaker 2>than that.

0:08:49.600 --> 0:08:54.280
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, but any kind of just numerical representation is quantitative,

0:08:54.800 --> 0:08:59.040
<v Speaker 1>whereas qualitative is behavioral, like I'm going to watch that

0:08:59.120 --> 0:09:03.080
<v Speaker 1>bird eat and poop for the next week.

0:09:03.880 --> 0:09:06.600
<v Speaker 2>Right, Or what happens if I What will the slug

0:09:06.679 --> 0:09:08.400
<v Speaker 2>do if I put a bunch of salt on it?

0:09:09.280 --> 0:09:11.480
<v Speaker 2>You know, don't do that? No, you really should not

0:09:11.559 --> 0:09:11.840
<v Speaker 2>do that.

0:09:11.960 --> 0:09:12.760
<v Speaker 1>No, that's awful.

0:09:12.840 --> 0:09:16.679
<v Speaker 2>But the reaction of the slug is gathering qualitative data.

0:09:16.720 --> 0:09:20.239
<v Speaker 2>And depending on who you talk to, there isn't qualitative

0:09:20.320 --> 0:09:22.960
<v Speaker 2>data and science that it should all just be quantitative

0:09:23.040 --> 0:09:30.720
<v Speaker 2>because yeah, because quantitative data is reproducible. Qualitative data is

0:09:31.880 --> 0:09:35.679
<v Speaker 2>it's not necessarily reproducible. You can observe the same phenomenon,

0:09:35.920 --> 0:09:38.280
<v Speaker 2>but you're not necessarily controlling it.

0:09:38.960 --> 0:09:41.000
<v Speaker 1>Okay, well, I guess I get that. But I agree

0:09:41.040 --> 0:09:43.160
<v Speaker 1>with Bill here and that they are both they go

0:09:43.280 --> 0:09:45.800
<v Speaker 1>hand in hand. Yeah, and neither one is more important

0:09:45.800 --> 0:09:46.800
<v Speaker 1>than the other. You need to have both.

0:09:46.880 --> 0:09:48.640
<v Speaker 2>Well, a lot of people do, and we'll talk more

0:09:48.640 --> 0:09:51.920
<v Speaker 2>about it later, because without the idea that qualitative data

0:09:52.320 --> 0:09:56.839
<v Speaker 2>is acceptable and scientific, you don't have the social sciences,

0:09:56.840 --> 0:09:57.720
<v Speaker 2>Like they don't exist.

0:09:57.920 --> 0:09:59.000
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, that's a good point.

0:09:58.840 --> 0:10:03.319
<v Speaker 2>You know, But yes, we have quantitative data and qualitative data.

0:10:03.360 --> 0:10:05.360
<v Speaker 2>I agree with you, they're both useful.

0:10:05.520 --> 0:10:10.680
<v Speaker 1>Okay, it is an intellectual pursuit. So you can make

0:10:10.720 --> 0:10:14.680
<v Speaker 1>observations on data all day long. But until you bring reason,

0:10:14.760 --> 0:10:18.839
<v Speaker 1>in this case, inductive reasoning, which is driving a generalization

0:10:18.960 --> 0:10:23.720
<v Speaker 1>based on your observations, then it's just data sitting there

0:10:23.760 --> 0:10:25.720
<v Speaker 1>on a piece of paper like it's supposed to lead

0:10:25.800 --> 0:10:27.000
<v Speaker 1>you somewhere.

0:10:26.840 --> 0:10:29.640
<v Speaker 2>Right exactly, And so we should talk about inductive and

0:10:29.679 --> 0:10:33.079
<v Speaker 2>deductive reasoning and it depending. Again. It's really weird. One

0:10:33.080 --> 0:10:35.000
<v Speaker 2>of the things I came across is that there's not

0:10:35.880 --> 0:10:40.560
<v Speaker 2>a universal agreement on how science is carried out. Like

0:10:41.440 --> 0:10:43.280
<v Speaker 2>I've saw some places where there was like there's no

0:10:43.360 --> 0:10:47.920
<v Speaker 2>place for inductive reasoning in science. Then other places are saying, well,

0:10:47.960 --> 0:10:51.640
<v Speaker 2>you have to have science using inductive reasoning. Everybody seems

0:10:51.679 --> 0:10:56.120
<v Speaker 2>to agree that deductive reasoning is the basis of science, right,

0:10:56.160 --> 0:10:58.760
<v Speaker 2>but that you also have to have inductive So deductive

0:10:58.800 --> 0:11:04.120
<v Speaker 2>is basically taking a big broad generalization and saying that

0:11:04.320 --> 0:11:05.680
<v Speaker 2>it applies to.

0:11:05.600 --> 0:11:07.760
<v Speaker 1>Something specific more specific.

0:11:07.920 --> 0:11:12.800
<v Speaker 2>Yes, inductive is the opposite where you say, I've noticed

0:11:12.840 --> 0:11:19.200
<v Speaker 2>these different data points, and that means that this broad

0:11:19.280 --> 0:11:23.719
<v Speaker 2>generalization is true. So you go from specific, small observations

0:11:23.760 --> 0:11:26.560
<v Speaker 2>to a broad generalization. And the reason that a lot

0:11:26.600 --> 0:11:29.679
<v Speaker 2>of people say, well, inductive reasoning doesn't have any place

0:11:29.720 --> 0:11:35.160
<v Speaker 2>in science is because you're saying, those birds over there

0:11:35.600 --> 0:11:39.199
<v Speaker 2>are all brown. Therefore all birds of that type are brown.

0:11:39.360 --> 0:11:41.440
<v Speaker 2>Even though I haven't seen every single bird of that

0:11:41.480 --> 0:11:44.240
<v Speaker 2>type in the world. I'm saying that all those birds

0:11:44.520 --> 0:11:46.560
<v Speaker 2>are brown, And a lot of people say there's no

0:11:46.559 --> 0:11:47.600
<v Speaker 2>place for that in science.

0:11:48.120 --> 0:11:49.960
<v Speaker 1>Well, if you want to go out and prove that,

0:11:50.000 --> 0:11:52.880
<v Speaker 1>then that's your business. You know. You can't just say

0:11:52.880 --> 0:11:55.720
<v Speaker 1>that and be like, and I'm done, right exactly, I

0:11:55.720 --> 0:11:58.559
<v Speaker 1>guess you could but be much of a scientist, right, but.

0:12:00.280 --> 0:12:03.200
<v Speaker 2>Use it to formulate, hey hypotheses. Sure, right, So you

0:12:03.200 --> 0:12:06.080
<v Speaker 2>can say I've generated all these data points, I'm gonna

0:12:06.080 --> 0:12:10.800
<v Speaker 2>put them together and see if this broad generalization is right. Okay,

0:12:10.880 --> 0:12:12.920
<v Speaker 2>so there is a place for inductive reasoning science. But

0:12:12.960 --> 0:12:16.760
<v Speaker 2>everybody says deductive reasoning is the basis of science.

0:12:17.240 --> 0:12:21.840
<v Speaker 1>Well, Bill Harris does. He offers a great example for

0:12:22.120 --> 0:12:27.120
<v Speaker 1>inductive reasoning with Edwin Hubble of the Hubble Telescope. He

0:12:27.320 --> 0:12:30.800
<v Speaker 1>was looking through the Hooker telescope which at the time

0:12:31.000 --> 0:12:33.360
<v Speaker 1>at California's Mount Wilson.

0:12:33.520 --> 0:12:35.400
<v Speaker 2>Is that the one from Rebel Without a Cause?

0:12:35.720 --> 0:12:41.800
<v Speaker 1>No, that's Griffith Park Observatory, which has been redesigned and

0:12:42.920 --> 0:12:44.719
<v Speaker 1>is really cool now, is it. Yeah. I mean it

0:12:44.760 --> 0:12:46.560
<v Speaker 1>was kind of cool before, but it was definitely like

0:12:47.120 --> 0:12:51.480
<v Speaker 1>sort of the base museum that time forgot. Oh really,

0:12:51.520 --> 0:12:52.360
<v Speaker 1>so they've updated it.

0:12:52.400 --> 0:12:54.240
<v Speaker 2>I'll bet that was cool though in its own way.

0:12:54.400 --> 0:12:55.839
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, it was neat. I used to live near there,

0:12:55.920 --> 0:12:56.760
<v Speaker 1>so it was kind of.

0:12:56.800 --> 0:12:59.280
<v Speaker 2>But that's like the famous one, at least in the movies.

0:12:59.480 --> 0:13:01.480
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, that's where they have the big knife fight. Yeah,

0:13:01.520 --> 0:13:03.520
<v Speaker 1>and there's this James Deane statue there too.

0:13:03.679 --> 0:13:06.719
<v Speaker 2>Oh I didn't like a bust.

0:13:07.040 --> 0:13:10.360
<v Speaker 1>So yes. Edwin Hubble he's at mountin Wilson and he's

0:13:10.360 --> 0:13:12.920
<v Speaker 1>looking through the Hooker telescope, which was the biggest one

0:13:13.000 --> 0:13:15.960
<v Speaker 1>and at the time everyone said the Milky Way Galaxy

0:13:16.040 --> 0:13:17.920
<v Speaker 1>is it? That's what we've got going on?

0:13:18.240 --> 0:13:18.800
<v Speaker 2>Did you know this?

0:13:19.800 --> 0:13:20.040
<v Speaker 1>Yeah?

0:13:20.040 --> 0:13:22.400
<v Speaker 2>I knew that because we're talking nineteen nineteen.

0:13:22.600 --> 0:13:25.080
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, not that long ago. He did not realize this,

0:13:25.160 --> 0:13:27.520
<v Speaker 1>and he started looking through the telescope and said, you

0:13:27.600 --> 0:13:30.160
<v Speaker 1>know what these nebula that everyone says they're part of

0:13:30.200 --> 0:13:33.880
<v Speaker 1>our galaxy, looked to me like they're beyond our galaxy.

0:13:34.160 --> 0:13:36.400
<v Speaker 1>And not only that, they look like they're moving away

0:13:36.440 --> 0:13:40.839
<v Speaker 1>from us. So he made this with through inductive reasoning,

0:13:40.920 --> 0:13:43.560
<v Speaker 1>made this observation that you know what, I think there

0:13:43.640 --> 0:13:47.000
<v Speaker 1>are many many galaxies out there, and not only that,

0:13:47.080 --> 0:13:51.760
<v Speaker 1>I think they are expanding. Yeah, and through technological advancement

0:13:51.800 --> 0:13:55.040
<v Speaker 1>with telescopes over the years, scientists, you know, it proved

0:13:55.160 --> 0:13:55.760
<v Speaker 1>to be true.

0:13:56.200 --> 0:13:58.760
<v Speaker 2>Yeah. Pretty cool. So this is a really good example

0:13:58.800 --> 0:14:02.319
<v Speaker 2>of him saying, like, I've made some observations and now

0:14:02.360 --> 0:14:06.520
<v Speaker 2>I'm going to say this broad generalization. Right, So these

0:14:07.200 --> 0:14:10.520
<v Speaker 2>these galaxies appear to be moving away from me another,

0:14:10.600 --> 0:14:15.360
<v Speaker 2>so the whole universe is expanding. Right, that's inductive reasoning.

0:14:15.440 --> 0:14:19.120
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, it's a pretty brave thing, especially back then, because

0:14:19.120 --> 0:14:21.480
<v Speaker 1>you're really putting your reputation at stake.

0:14:21.640 --> 0:14:24.400
<v Speaker 2>It really is, you know. So what Hubble was, what

0:14:24.520 --> 0:14:28.000
<v Speaker 2>Hubble did was what we've come to see as science.

0:14:28.040 --> 0:14:31.680
<v Speaker 2>He made some observations, he came up with a hypothesis,

0:14:32.800 --> 0:14:35.680
<v Speaker 2>and then it was tested later on. It's not you

0:14:35.720 --> 0:14:39.320
<v Speaker 2>don't necessarily as a scientist. You're a part of a

0:14:39.400 --> 0:14:44.240
<v Speaker 2>larger collective of scientists yes, right, And every scientist needs

0:14:44.240 --> 0:14:48.600
<v Speaker 2>one another. It's why there's journals and conferences and things

0:14:48.640 --> 0:14:50.240
<v Speaker 2>like that to share information.

0:14:49.920 --> 0:14:51.800
<v Speaker 1>Right into party, right, and to party.

0:14:52.160 --> 0:14:55.400
<v Speaker 2>And Hubble came up with his own observations, and rather

0:14:55.480 --> 0:14:59.440
<v Speaker 2>than just experimenting and experimenting, experimenting himself, which I'm sure

0:14:59.440 --> 0:15:02.800
<v Speaker 2>he continued to do, he created this basis of work

0:15:02.880 --> 0:15:07.120
<v Speaker 2>that he probably realized is going to survive him. Yeah, yeah, right.

0:15:07.520 --> 0:15:10.320
<v Speaker 2>And then later on scientists came down the road and

0:15:10.400 --> 0:15:14.760
<v Speaker 2>they tested his hypothesis and they found it was correct,

0:15:15.160 --> 0:15:18.040
<v Speaker 2>and so his hypothesis became a theory. It eventually became

0:15:18.120 --> 0:15:20.360
<v Speaker 2>part of the basis of the Big Bang theory that

0:15:20.400 --> 0:15:24.760
<v Speaker 2>the universe started as a huge explosion and it's expanding

0:15:24.920 --> 0:15:28.880
<v Speaker 2>still because we're because it exploded at one point, right.

0:15:29.560 --> 0:15:32.120
<v Speaker 2>And they did that by carrying out other.

0:15:32.480 --> 0:15:35.400
<v Speaker 1>Tests or experiments exactly.

0:15:35.960 --> 0:15:38.280
<v Speaker 2>So this is how science works. Like some guy back

0:15:38.320 --> 0:15:42.080
<v Speaker 2>in nineteen ninety makes some observations in California in nineteen

0:15:42.160 --> 0:15:47.120
<v Speaker 2>twenty five, he proposes this big broad generalization, and over

0:15:47.120 --> 0:15:50.680
<v Speaker 2>the next like ensuing half a century, more and more

0:15:50.720 --> 0:15:54.960
<v Speaker 2>scientists all around the world start testing his hypothesis and

0:15:55.080 --> 0:15:57.000
<v Speaker 2>find it to be true. So it becomes a theory.

0:15:57.240 --> 0:16:00.480
<v Speaker 1>Yeah. Well, well let's finish up here with sience Oka.

0:16:00.760 --> 0:16:04.240
<v Speaker 1>The last part of the definition is that it's systematic,

0:16:04.320 --> 0:16:09.120
<v Speaker 1>and it's methodical, and it requires testing and experiments, and

0:16:09.200 --> 0:16:15.080
<v Speaker 1>that requires those experiments and tests to be repeated and verified.

0:16:15.760 --> 0:16:20.120
<v Speaker 1>And it's a system. It's a way of working things out.

0:16:20.280 --> 0:16:22.640
<v Speaker 1>It's a way of working Yeah. That is the scientific

0:16:22.680 --> 0:16:26.600
<v Speaker 1>method basically. Yeah, you have your idea, you pose a question,

0:16:27.360 --> 0:16:31.040
<v Speaker 1>you theorize, or you put a hypothesis out there, and

0:16:31.080 --> 0:16:33.160
<v Speaker 1>then you go about trying to either prove it or

0:16:33.160 --> 0:16:33.680
<v Speaker 1>disprove it.

0:16:34.000 --> 0:16:36.040
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, exactly. And then the way that you go about

0:16:36.160 --> 0:16:39.800
<v Speaker 2>proving or disproving it, that's the scientific method. Everything else

0:16:39.880 --> 0:16:43.440
<v Speaker 2>is just scientific inquiry. The way you go about, the

0:16:43.520 --> 0:16:47.360
<v Speaker 2>standardized way of going about scientific inquiry is the scientific method.

0:16:47.640 --> 0:16:51.120
<v Speaker 2>And we, friend, we'll talk about the scientific method right

0:16:51.160 --> 0:16:51.520
<v Speaker 2>after this.

0:17:08.119 --> 0:17:10.199
<v Speaker 1>All right, you brought up a point. I think we

0:17:10.200 --> 0:17:12.680
<v Speaker 1>should go ahead and just get right to my friend,

0:17:12.760 --> 0:17:15.159
<v Speaker 1>let's do it. Hypotheses and theories.

0:17:16.160 --> 0:17:18.040
<v Speaker 2>One thing tough to say together. I know.

0:17:18.960 --> 0:17:24.000
<v Speaker 1>One thing that really chafes my hide is when you

0:17:24.040 --> 0:17:27.680
<v Speaker 1>hear poopoo ers of whatever scientific theory say, well, it's

0:17:27.720 --> 0:17:30.280
<v Speaker 1>just a theory. Yeah, and you where was this thing

0:17:30.320 --> 0:17:34.000
<v Speaker 1>that you found that poopoo that Do you remember what

0:17:34.119 --> 0:17:34.919
<v Speaker 1>website that was?

0:17:36.880 --> 0:17:39.440
<v Speaker 2>No, No, although I do want to give a shout

0:17:39.440 --> 0:17:42.240
<v Speaker 2>out now that you mentioned it. Two explorables. Yeah, it's

0:17:42.240 --> 0:17:47.240
<v Speaker 2>like an online university, basically a free courses and there

0:17:47.400 --> 0:17:50.960
<v Speaker 2>is one on scientific reasoning that is just amazing. It's

0:17:51.040 --> 0:17:53.000
<v Speaker 2>like a huge rabbit hole. You go down and you

0:17:53.200 --> 0:17:56.040
<v Speaker 2>start clicking on the embedded links and you end up

0:17:56.080 --> 0:17:59.280
<v Speaker 2>like understanding all sorts of stuff. So go check that.

0:17:59.240 --> 0:18:02.880
<v Speaker 1>One out if you like understanding stuff. Right, So that's

0:18:02.880 --> 0:18:04.440
<v Speaker 1>one of the things that bugged me if someone says

0:18:04.440 --> 0:18:06.720
<v Speaker 1>it's just a theory, and this does a great job

0:18:06.760 --> 0:18:10.800
<v Speaker 1>of kind of throwing that out the window because it's

0:18:10.800 --> 0:18:13.800
<v Speaker 1>basically mixing up the two definitions of theory.

0:18:14.000 --> 0:18:17.120
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, there's like a colloquial definition that people use every

0:18:17.160 --> 0:18:19.480
<v Speaker 2>day that doesn't really have much to do with the

0:18:19.520 --> 0:18:20.520
<v Speaker 2>scientific cuses.

0:18:20.359 --> 0:18:23.960
<v Speaker 1>Like, I got a theory that Jerry and one hour

0:18:24.000 --> 0:18:28.520
<v Speaker 1>bathroom breaks every day is really playing words with friends

0:18:29.440 --> 0:18:30.120
<v Speaker 1>in the lobby.

0:18:30.640 --> 0:18:32.040
<v Speaker 2>I think your theory is correct.

0:18:32.240 --> 0:18:36.879
<v Speaker 1>So that's a theory in the colloquial meaning as far

0:18:36.880 --> 0:18:41.760
<v Speaker 1>as science goes. A theory is not just something you postulate, say,

0:18:41.880 --> 0:18:44.040
<v Speaker 1>this may or may not be true. A theory is

0:18:44.119 --> 0:18:48.080
<v Speaker 1>beyond the hypothesis, and it's something that is strongly supported

0:18:48.600 --> 0:18:52.080
<v Speaker 1>in many different ways and all there's all kinds of

0:18:52.080 --> 0:18:55.000
<v Speaker 1>evidence to support something that eventually becomes a theory.

0:18:55.119 --> 0:18:59.359
<v Speaker 2>Right, So what you your theory about Jerry's bathroom breaks

0:18:59.800 --> 0:19:05.240
<v Speaker 2>this scientific world would be a hypothesis. What fact, it

0:19:05.320 --> 0:19:08.920
<v Speaker 2>would be a scientific law, but it ultimately would begin

0:19:09.000 --> 0:19:13.199
<v Speaker 2>as a hypothesis, a hunch based on intuition, based on

0:19:13.880 --> 0:19:17.600
<v Speaker 2>data you've collected, observations, that kind of stuff. Where Like,

0:19:17.680 --> 0:19:20.920
<v Speaker 2>you know, you've seen that Jerry goes to the bathroom

0:19:21.000 --> 0:19:24.600
<v Speaker 2>for like an hour to stretch frequently. When she comes back,

0:19:24.680 --> 0:19:28.760
<v Speaker 2>she's finishing up a game of words with friends. Sure,

0:19:29.359 --> 0:19:32.240
<v Speaker 2>you've heard that she's been spotted in the lobby during

0:19:32.280 --> 0:19:36.560
<v Speaker 2>these times. So your hypothesis is that while she is

0:19:36.640 --> 0:19:39.240
<v Speaker 2>gone for these hour long bathroom breaks, she's actually down

0:19:39.280 --> 0:19:40.560
<v Speaker 2>the lobby playing words with friends.

0:19:40.600 --> 0:19:44.280
<v Speaker 1>Right, Yeah, based on knowledge, observation, and logic. Right.

0:19:44.320 --> 0:19:46.920
<v Speaker 2>So let's say that you decided to set up an experiment,

0:19:47.000 --> 0:19:49.639
<v Speaker 2>and you experimented, and you went and you found Jerry

0:19:49.640 --> 0:19:53.199
<v Speaker 2>playing words with friends. Yeah, five different times, and you

0:19:53.359 --> 0:19:55.720
<v Speaker 2>told me about it, and I was like, I'm going

0:19:55.760 --> 0:19:59.080
<v Speaker 2>to run that same experiment exactly the way you did. Yeah, right,

0:19:59.560 --> 0:20:02.520
<v Speaker 2>I would test that same hypothsis. If I found the

0:20:02.520 --> 0:20:05.119
<v Speaker 2>same results to be true, then what you would have

0:20:05.200 --> 0:20:08.199
<v Speaker 2>come up with, your hypothesis would move to basically a

0:20:08.320 --> 0:20:12.840
<v Speaker 2>theory that is, this widely accepted thing, this explanation that

0:20:13.440 --> 0:20:17.520
<v Speaker 2>Jerry is not actually in the bathroom, she's downstairs playing

0:20:17.520 --> 0:20:21.440
<v Speaker 2>with friends. It'd be the Jerry bathroom break theory, that's right.

0:20:21.760 --> 0:20:25.400
<v Speaker 2>And then if it turns out that you find that

0:20:25.800 --> 0:20:29.040
<v Speaker 2>Jerry spending an hour a day pretending to be in

0:20:29.080 --> 0:20:33.680
<v Speaker 2>the bathroom but actually being downstairs playing words with friends,

0:20:35.320 --> 0:20:39.240
<v Speaker 2>if the universe couldn't exist without her doing that every day, yeah,

0:20:39.480 --> 0:20:41.880
<v Speaker 2>you would have a scientific law.

0:20:41.800 --> 0:20:42.240
<v Speaker 1>That's right.

0:20:43.320 --> 0:20:45.879
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, I think that was a good example you came

0:20:45.960 --> 0:20:46.159
<v Speaker 2>up with.

0:20:46.200 --> 0:20:49.960
<v Speaker 1>Well, that's a great example, as it turns out. I

0:20:50.000 --> 0:20:52.399
<v Speaker 1>guess the point here is when you hear someone say

0:20:52.880 --> 0:20:56.040
<v Speaker 1>in an argument, well that's just a theory, just punch

0:20:56.119 --> 0:20:58.119
<v Speaker 1>him in the head and then tell them what we

0:20:58.280 --> 0:20:59.960
<v Speaker 1>just said about the bathroom breaks.

0:21:00.080 --> 0:21:03.440
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, and they'll say, who's cherry or just queue up

0:21:03.600 --> 0:21:07.520
<v Speaker 2>that whole bit and stand outside of their window wearing

0:21:07.520 --> 0:21:09.439
<v Speaker 2>a trench coat and holding a boom box over your

0:21:09.480 --> 0:21:11.720
<v Speaker 2>head with the smug look on your face.

0:21:13.600 --> 0:21:15.880
<v Speaker 1>All right, So should we go back in the old

0:21:15.880 --> 0:21:17.720
<v Speaker 1>way back machine a little bit and just talk a

0:21:17.720 --> 0:21:20.000
<v Speaker 1>little bit about how the scientific method came to be?

0:21:20.520 --> 0:21:32.000
<v Speaker 2>Yes, man, this this thing? What are you running this

0:21:32.119 --> 0:21:36.480
<v Speaker 2>on these days? A straight kerosene? The fumes in here

0:21:36.520 --> 0:21:37.199
<v Speaker 2>are killing me.

0:21:37.640 --> 0:21:39.600
<v Speaker 1>Sorry about that. I'm trying to go green.

0:21:39.760 --> 0:21:41.720
<v Speaker 2>You know, kerosene is not green.

0:21:43.000 --> 0:21:47.639
<v Speaker 1>Diesel. Maybe I'm choking biodiesel? How about that? Okay, the

0:21:47.640 --> 0:21:50.040
<v Speaker 1>way back machine will run French fried grease. That would

0:21:50.080 --> 0:21:52.320
<v Speaker 1>be fine, right, I'll get to work on that. I

0:21:52.359 --> 0:21:56.040
<v Speaker 1>could handle this few So you tease this with the Renaissance,

0:21:56.080 --> 0:21:59.200
<v Speaker 1>and the reason the Renaissance was so awesome and necessary

0:21:59.240 --> 0:22:01.920
<v Speaker 1>it was because of something else we've talked about, which

0:22:02.000 --> 0:22:03.360
<v Speaker 1>was the Dark Ages.

0:22:04.359 --> 0:22:10.120
<v Speaker 2>Which remember that's a rationalist's disparaging term for this era.

0:22:10.280 --> 0:22:14.920
<v Speaker 1>That's right, but I think sort of rightfully so, because

0:22:15.400 --> 0:22:17.840
<v Speaker 1>right before the Dark Ages until about a century after,

0:22:18.280 --> 0:22:21.520
<v Speaker 1>there was not much advancement at all in the realm

0:22:21.560 --> 0:22:22.800
<v Speaker 1>of scientific advancement.

0:22:24.440 --> 0:22:26.919
<v Speaker 2>No, it's true, it's hard to argue with that, and

0:22:26.960 --> 0:22:30.280
<v Speaker 2>The reason why is again, science wasn't really born yet,

0:22:30.640 --> 0:22:34.320
<v Speaker 2>and there is a huge struggle between rationalism and mysticism,

0:22:34.400 --> 0:22:38.000
<v Speaker 2>and ultimately we're living in the age of rationalism now.

0:22:38.240 --> 0:22:40.240
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, and we should point out too that this was

0:22:40.359 --> 0:22:44.080
<v Speaker 1>mainly in Europe over in the Islamic world. As I

0:22:44.119 --> 0:22:46.159
<v Speaker 1>think we had a listener mail point out, there were

0:22:46.160 --> 0:22:49.320
<v Speaker 1>a lot of advancements being made just sort of flying

0:22:49.440 --> 0:22:53.720
<v Speaker 1>under the European radar at the time, because some say

0:22:53.800 --> 0:22:56.800
<v Speaker 1>the Catholic Church kind of kept science under its thumb

0:22:56.880 --> 0:22:59.639
<v Speaker 1>for a while. Yeah, and it's a pretty big threat

0:23:00.880 --> 0:23:02.480
<v Speaker 1>and said, you know, you can't do this stuff, you

0:23:02.520 --> 0:23:05.600
<v Speaker 1>can't experiment like this, and don't ask these questions, right

0:23:06.280 --> 0:23:09.920
<v Speaker 1>because here are your answers. Yeah. But eventually the Renaissance

0:23:10.000 --> 0:23:12.720
<v Speaker 1>came about in the twelfth century and people woke up

0:23:12.760 --> 0:23:15.640
<v Speaker 1>and saw some of the work in the Islamic world

0:23:15.680 --> 0:23:18.040
<v Speaker 1>and said, you know what, maybe let's start reading up

0:23:18.040 --> 0:23:20.920
<v Speaker 1>on Aristotle and tootle of me and euclid it once again.

0:23:21.040 --> 0:23:23.359
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, they're like, we forgot about these guys.

0:23:23.560 --> 0:23:26.000
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, I mean it literally kind of vanished for a while, it.

0:23:26.000 --> 0:23:29.520
<v Speaker 2>Did from the West. Yes, Fortunately it was still around,

0:23:29.640 --> 0:23:32.520
<v Speaker 2>you know, in its home places. But yes, in the

0:23:32.560 --> 0:23:35.720
<v Speaker 2>West they were lost. The Roman stuff was almost entirely

0:23:35.800 --> 0:23:38.560
<v Speaker 2>lost because it was being suppressed by the locals.

0:23:38.720 --> 0:23:41.520
<v Speaker 1>And I think the Greek knowledge was completely vanished.

0:23:41.760 --> 0:23:45.360
<v Speaker 2>Yes, somehow, somehow they got there was some We got

0:23:45.400 --> 0:23:47.879
<v Speaker 2>another listener mail after the Enlightenment. One they said that

0:23:47.960 --> 0:23:51.879
<v Speaker 2>it was an Islamic scholar who was the one who

0:23:52.240 --> 0:23:57.680
<v Speaker 2>translated Aristotle right into Latin or something like that, and

0:23:57.720 --> 0:24:00.560
<v Speaker 2>that without this guy, like the West wouldn't have had

0:24:00.680 --> 0:24:03.600
<v Speaker 2>much to start with. Because that's where that birth of

0:24:03.720 --> 0:24:07.919
<v Speaker 2>rationalism came from, was this rediscovery of Greek and Roman

0:24:08.040 --> 0:24:12.520
<v Speaker 2>classical thought. And this was the basis of scientific inquiry,

0:24:12.560 --> 0:24:16.359
<v Speaker 2>of rationalism, of saying, like, okay, there's set rules to things,

0:24:16.359 --> 0:24:18.520
<v Speaker 2>and we need to discover these rules and how the

0:24:19.080 --> 0:24:21.600
<v Speaker 2>principles of how the universe works, like there has to

0:24:21.640 --> 0:24:23.960
<v Speaker 2>be principles, and we need to find this in a rational,

0:24:24.000 --> 0:24:29.000
<v Speaker 2>methodical way. And right out of the gate, Europe said, oh, okay,

0:24:29.040 --> 0:24:31.919
<v Speaker 2>well whatever you say is right, then, Aristotle, We're used

0:24:31.960 --> 0:24:35.119
<v Speaker 2>to just believing everything without questioning it. Yeah, And luckily

0:24:35.240 --> 0:24:37.080
<v Speaker 2>albert Magnus, I think is who it was.

0:24:37.840 --> 0:24:38.520
<v Speaker 1>Albertus.

0:24:38.800 --> 0:24:41.600
<v Speaker 2>Was it Albertus Magnus or Roger Bacon, who said, no,

0:24:41.680 --> 0:24:44.840
<v Speaker 2>it is Bacon. Roger Bacon, who just has this great name,

0:24:45.119 --> 0:24:46.720
<v Speaker 2>Roger Bacon.

0:24:46.480 --> 0:24:50.800
<v Speaker 1>The Bacon brothers. Yeah, he says, Roger, Right, they weren't brothers,

0:24:51.040 --> 0:24:53.000
<v Speaker 1>But were they related at all? You know, I look

0:24:53.080 --> 0:24:56.640
<v Speaker 1>that up and I don't think people know either way.

0:24:56.720 --> 0:24:58.480
<v Speaker 1>I don't think there's any proof, but a lot of

0:24:58.480 --> 0:25:01.200
<v Speaker 1>people think because of the names and the way things

0:25:01.240 --> 0:25:04.240
<v Speaker 1>went back then, that they may very well have been lighted.

0:25:04.359 --> 0:25:06.560
<v Speaker 2>And I mean they were separated by three hundred or

0:25:06.600 --> 0:25:07.240
<v Speaker 2>so years.

0:25:07.520 --> 0:25:10.680
<v Speaker 1>Although Roger was a was a monk, so he would

0:25:10.680 --> 0:25:13.440
<v Speaker 1>not have had children. So if they were, it's an

0:25:13.440 --> 0:25:16.879
<v Speaker 1>excellent point. It wasn't necessarily through his line, gotcha, you know.

0:25:17.080 --> 0:25:19.639
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, it could have been a nephew or something.

0:25:19.760 --> 0:25:23.400
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, or his brother Kevin might have had the line

0:25:23.440 --> 0:25:23.960
<v Speaker 1>that matched.

0:25:24.280 --> 0:25:27.399
<v Speaker 2>So Roger was the one who said, everybody stopped. Just

0:25:27.440 --> 0:25:31.359
<v Speaker 2>because Aristotle wrote something doesn't mean it's fact, especially when

0:25:31.680 --> 0:25:35.760
<v Speaker 2>we find contradictions to it. Yeah, it doesn't Aircell's not

0:25:35.800 --> 0:25:37.960
<v Speaker 2>automatically right, and this is a huge advancement.

0:25:38.520 --> 0:25:42.200
<v Speaker 1>Yeah. And Albertus Magnus was the one, I believe who said,

0:25:43.560 --> 0:25:47.240
<v Speaker 1>you know this thing called revealed truth, which is basically

0:25:47.520 --> 0:25:51.440
<v Speaker 1>God says this instead of a truth found by experimenting,

0:25:52.080 --> 0:25:55.479
<v Speaker 1>is maybe we should experiment instead and not take this

0:25:55.560 --> 0:25:57.200
<v Speaker 1>revealed truth as the truth.

0:25:57.400 --> 0:26:00.240
<v Speaker 2>Right. And we mentioned in the Enlightenment episode of Well

0:26:00.240 --> 0:26:06.640
<v Speaker 2>about scholasticism, about using scientific inquiry to explain theology, right,

0:26:06.680 --> 0:26:10.720
<v Speaker 2>which was, you know, you're still working from a theological standpoint,

0:26:10.960 --> 0:26:15.320
<v Speaker 2>but you're starting to use scientific inquiry and the the

0:26:15.480 --> 0:26:18.359
<v Speaker 2>idea that you shouldn't just accept things as truth. That

0:26:18.520 --> 0:26:20.520
<v Speaker 2>was again a huge, huge breakthrough.

0:26:20.680 --> 0:26:24.040
<v Speaker 1>Yeah. Uh. Francis Bacon, the other Bacon.

0:26:23.920 --> 0:26:25.919
<v Speaker 2>Brother, he's one of the heroes of this story.

0:26:26.040 --> 0:26:30.480
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, he was an attorney and philosopher and possibly Shakespeare.

0:26:31.119 --> 0:26:31.840
<v Speaker 2>Oh really, huh?

0:26:31.920 --> 0:26:36.800
<v Speaker 1>I never heard that. Oh yeah, interesting. So what do

0:26:36.840 --> 0:26:40.400
<v Speaker 1>you mean, like wrote those under the a pseudonym? Yeah, huh.

0:26:40.640 --> 0:26:42.760
<v Speaker 1>And then the Shakespeare sister was the other theory too,

0:26:42.840 --> 0:26:45.400
<v Speaker 1>Right it was a woman. I've heard that, Yeah, and

0:26:45.440 --> 0:26:48.680
<v Speaker 1>she couldn't, like, you know, women couldn't be the playwright.

0:26:48.800 --> 0:26:50.840
<v Speaker 1>So that's her dumb brother, William.

0:26:50.920 --> 0:26:52.720
<v Speaker 2>That's a good credit, was it her brother?

0:26:53.480 --> 0:26:54.959
<v Speaker 1>I think that was one of the theories.

0:26:55.080 --> 0:26:57.359
<v Speaker 2>Huh. This was a good Smith song too.

0:26:58.560 --> 0:27:01.000
<v Speaker 1>Uh. Shakespeare sister? Is that the name of it. Yeah,

0:27:01.560 --> 0:27:02.440
<v Speaker 1>wasn't it a band too?

0:27:03.600 --> 0:27:04.960
<v Speaker 2>I think it was? What was it?

0:27:05.000 --> 0:27:10.199
<v Speaker 1>Maybe? So anyway, he was a philosopher and a lawyer,

0:27:10.800 --> 0:27:15.879
<v Speaker 1>and he said, you know what, the Baconian method basically

0:27:15.880 --> 0:27:17.320
<v Speaker 1>became the scientific method.

0:27:17.440 --> 0:27:17.720
<v Speaker 2>Yeah.

0:27:17.800 --> 0:27:20.480
<v Speaker 1>He was the first dude who really said, this is

0:27:20.880 --> 0:27:24.959
<v Speaker 1>how the steps that you should take to investigate science.

0:27:25.160 --> 0:27:27.280
<v Speaker 2>Right, there has to be a framework. And the whole

0:27:27.320 --> 0:27:30.480
<v Speaker 2>point of this that we take this so for granted

0:27:30.520 --> 0:27:37.359
<v Speaker 2>now because it's so intuitively and on its face, right, yeah,

0:27:37.440 --> 0:27:40.080
<v Speaker 2>as far as scienceific inquiry goes. But this is an

0:27:40.240 --> 0:27:44.560
<v Speaker 2>enormous breakthrough to say, you follow this step, these steps,

0:27:44.640 --> 0:27:49.760
<v Speaker 2>this framework, and if everybody who carries out science follows

0:27:49.760 --> 0:27:54.040
<v Speaker 2>the same framework, then science will be universal and interchangeable

0:27:54.400 --> 0:27:58.200
<v Speaker 2>and anyone in the world and not just now, but anytime. Yeah,

0:27:58.320 --> 0:28:02.280
<v Speaker 2>we'll be able to carry out the same experiment and

0:28:02.600 --> 0:28:05.719
<v Speaker 2>we'll be able to verify or disprove it. Yeah, and

0:28:06.000 --> 0:28:10.600
<v Speaker 2>that is amazing that that happened. That's why Francis Bacon

0:28:10.640 --> 0:28:12.040
<v Speaker 2>is one of the heroes of the story. And he

0:28:12.040 --> 0:28:14.520
<v Speaker 2>didn't come up with this entirely on his own, but

0:28:14.640 --> 0:28:17.120
<v Speaker 2>he was the one who said this is what we're

0:28:17.119 --> 0:28:18.800
<v Speaker 2>going to do. I'm going to give it a name.

0:28:19.040 --> 0:28:21.520
<v Speaker 2>I'm going to spell it out, and from now on

0:28:21.880 --> 0:28:25.359
<v Speaker 2>you can call me the dad of the scientific method.

0:28:25.640 --> 0:28:28.000
<v Speaker 1>Yeah. And that's why Newton was such a rock star,

0:28:28.080 --> 0:28:32.239
<v Speaker 1>because he's so rigorously stuck to the scientific method that

0:28:32.320 --> 0:28:35.920
<v Speaker 1>all these centuries later, his you know, his systems of

0:28:36.000 --> 0:28:38.200
<v Speaker 1>laws are they have stood the test of time.

0:28:38.360 --> 0:28:38.719
<v Speaker 2>Yeah.

0:28:38.760 --> 0:28:40.840
<v Speaker 1>And I think it's a good point to bring up

0:28:40.840 --> 0:28:47.120
<v Speaker 1>to that the collaboration of scientists is really the hallmark

0:28:47.280 --> 0:28:52.520
<v Speaker 1>of advancement and moving forward. It's not working in a vacuum.

0:28:52.720 --> 0:28:55.280
<v Speaker 1>It's sharing your ideas and working with one another. And

0:28:55.880 --> 0:28:58.840
<v Speaker 1>the whole little sidebar here on self theory I thought

0:28:58.920 --> 0:29:03.040
<v Speaker 1>was pretty cool, which was when science quit or not quit,

0:29:03.160 --> 0:29:06.680
<v Speaker 1>but started looking at small things instead of looking at

0:29:06.720 --> 0:29:11.480
<v Speaker 1>the universe around them and at the stars. Right, and said, basically,

0:29:11.920 --> 0:29:16.760
<v Speaker 1>you know, through the advancement of lens grinding, Antonio van Levin'

0:29:16.760 --> 0:29:20.960
<v Speaker 1>Hook specifically a Dutch tradesman, was pretty good at making

0:29:20.960 --> 0:29:24.480
<v Speaker 1>simple microscopes, and all of a sudden, contemporaries like Robert

0:29:24.520 --> 0:29:26.880
<v Speaker 1>Hook said, you know what, let's start looking at tiny

0:29:26.920 --> 0:29:30.680
<v Speaker 1>things because therein might lie the answer to many many things.

0:29:30.880 --> 0:29:35.160
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, and they're right. Robert Hook found cork, or he

0:29:35.240 --> 0:29:39.760
<v Speaker 2>discovered cells by looking at cork, Yeah, through an early microscope.

0:29:39.800 --> 0:29:46.280
<v Speaker 2>So in this story, sciences hastened by technological advancement lens grinding, yeah,

0:29:46.360 --> 0:29:49.400
<v Speaker 2>and to make microscopes, and then this new technology is

0:29:49.520 --> 0:29:51.040
<v Speaker 2>used to further science, right.

0:29:51.120 --> 0:29:55.120
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, it's like mutual inspiration between Leavin Hook and Hook.

0:29:55.920 --> 0:29:56.520
<v Speaker 1>Leavin Hook.

0:29:56.680 --> 0:30:02.520
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, it was neat because Hook heard about Leavin Hook's microscopes. Yeah,

0:30:02.560 --> 0:30:05.640
<v Speaker 2>got his hands on one or a microscope, looked at

0:30:05.720 --> 0:30:08.360
<v Speaker 2>him like a cork, and said, oh, there's such a thing

0:30:08.360 --> 0:30:11.560
<v Speaker 2>as cells, right. Leavin Hook said, oh, that's pretty neat.

0:30:11.640 --> 0:30:13.760
<v Speaker 2>Let me try. And he said, oh, there's such a

0:30:13.800 --> 0:30:18.440
<v Speaker 2>thing as quote little animals, right, which we call protozoan bacteria. Yeah,

0:30:18.480 --> 0:30:22.040
<v Speaker 2>and one of the Royal Societies. After Leaving Hook presented

0:30:22.040 --> 0:30:25.640
<v Speaker 2>his findings, turned back to Hook and said, hey, Hook,

0:30:25.680 --> 0:30:27.640
<v Speaker 2>we know you're pretty handy with the microscope. Yeah, he

0:30:27.800 --> 0:30:31.720
<v Speaker 2>confirmed leaving Hook's findings are their little animals. Hook said

0:30:32.560 --> 0:30:35.880
<v Speaker 2>there are, indeed, I can see them with my microscope.

0:30:35.280 --> 0:30:38.880
<v Speaker 1>That's right. And that inspired a German botanist name Mattias

0:30:39.000 --> 0:30:43.360
<v Speaker 1>Schleiden to look at a lot of plants and he

0:30:43.600 --> 0:30:46.240
<v Speaker 1>was the first guy to say, you know what, plants

0:30:46.240 --> 0:30:48.440
<v Speaker 1>are composed of cells. And he was having dinner one

0:30:48.520 --> 0:30:50.560
<v Speaker 1>night with his zoologist buddy.

0:30:50.640 --> 0:30:52.640
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, and this is about one hundred years later.

0:30:52.760 --> 0:30:57.640
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, Theodore schwan and said, you know what, dude, order

0:30:57.760 --> 0:31:01.400
<v Speaker 1>the wine and order the ste trust me because this

0:31:01.480 --> 0:31:06.560
<v Speaker 1>place is fantastic. And also, plants are made of cells.

0:31:06.680 --> 0:31:09.040
<v Speaker 1>Don't tell anyone. And he went, you know what, dude,

0:31:09.160 --> 0:31:12.760
<v Speaker 1>I have been investigating animals with microscopes and they're made

0:31:12.800 --> 0:31:13.440
<v Speaker 1>of cells too.

0:31:13.760 --> 0:31:16.400
<v Speaker 2>And so they figured out at this dinner, yeah, that

0:31:16.560 --> 0:31:18.920
<v Speaker 2>everything is made of sales, all living things are made

0:31:18.960 --> 0:31:19.560
<v Speaker 2>of cells.

0:31:19.760 --> 0:31:20.200
<v Speaker 1>Boom.

0:31:20.280 --> 0:31:23.400
<v Speaker 2>Okay, so this is huge. This is a big advancement, right, Yeah,

0:31:23.680 --> 0:31:27.080
<v Speaker 2>we're hitting upon right now. Huge, but it laid the

0:31:27.160 --> 0:31:31.640
<v Speaker 2>further foundation, right, So initial scientific inquiry led to further

0:31:31.720 --> 0:31:37.680
<v Speaker 2>scientific inquiry and further scientific conclusions and generalizations All living

0:31:37.720 --> 0:31:41.720
<v Speaker 2>things are made of cells, and then it was extrapolated elsewhere. Right.

0:31:41.800 --> 0:31:46.239
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, Like twenty years later, Rudolph Virtual said, you know what,

0:31:46.360 --> 0:31:49.760
<v Speaker 1>not only is everything made of living cells, but they

0:31:50.000 --> 0:31:53.280
<v Speaker 1>all come from pre existing cells, which was a huge

0:31:53.280 --> 0:31:56.880
<v Speaker 1>deal at the time because people believed in spontaneous generation.

0:31:57.200 --> 0:32:01.000
<v Speaker 2>Yeah. At the time, like if you left some wheat

0:32:01.000 --> 0:32:04.080
<v Speaker 2>seed in a sweaty shirt, it would spawn mice. I

0:32:04.120 --> 0:32:06.840
<v Speaker 2>think was one of them. Gross, there's a lot of

0:32:06.880 --> 0:32:10.160
<v Speaker 2>weird ones. Press basil between some bricks and you'll get

0:32:10.160 --> 0:32:13.800
<v Speaker 2>a scorpion. Was one, like they were really out there?

0:32:14.040 --> 0:32:16.560
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, well the one that is well not true. But

0:32:16.600 --> 0:32:19.600
<v Speaker 1>the one that you could actually see was rotten meat

0:32:19.640 --> 0:32:22.200
<v Speaker 1>would eventually spawn maggots.

0:32:22.280 --> 0:32:23.880
<v Speaker 2>Right, how did they possibly get there?

0:32:24.000 --> 0:32:25.480
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, spontaneous generation.

0:32:25.640 --> 0:32:28.440
<v Speaker 2>But that's the obvious explanation, and if you think about it,

0:32:28.480 --> 0:32:31.720
<v Speaker 2>they're working from Okham's razor. An Okham's razor says, the

0:32:31.760 --> 0:32:36.480
<v Speaker 2>simplest explanation is usually the right one. Yeah, all other

0:32:36.520 --> 0:32:39.480
<v Speaker 2>things given. Well, the thing is is spontaneous generation has

0:32:39.520 --> 0:32:42.800
<v Speaker 2>never been shown to be possible. Right, if we've got

0:32:42.800 --> 0:32:46.800
<v Speaker 2>the cell thing over here, let's investigate that. So this

0:32:47.360 --> 0:32:50.959
<v Speaker 2>what was the guy's name, Virchow? Yes, he's saying, okay,

0:32:51.040 --> 0:32:53.640
<v Speaker 2>well wait a minute, I've got this cell theory I'm

0:32:53.640 --> 0:32:55.880
<v Speaker 2>working on that's been around for a couple of decades.

0:32:56.160 --> 0:32:59.640
<v Speaker 2>Hypothesis probably cell hypothesis at the nice catch.

0:32:59.720 --> 0:33:01.920
<v Speaker 1>Don't feel bad though, because this article that you sent

0:33:02.000 --> 0:33:06.960
<v Speaker 1>said that scientists today like still like confuse those terms, Yeah,

0:33:07.200 --> 0:33:08.240
<v Speaker 1>just colloquially.

0:33:08.400 --> 0:33:10.760
<v Speaker 2>And the House Stiff Works article makes a good point

0:33:10.760 --> 0:33:13.080
<v Speaker 2>in saying that science and everything that has to do

0:33:13.160 --> 0:33:16.280
<v Speaker 2>with it is in the scientific method is very fluid, Yeah,

0:33:16.320 --> 0:33:20.920
<v Speaker 2>and open new interpretation and experimentation. Yeah, obviously. But so

0:33:21.080 --> 0:33:24.840
<v Speaker 2>he says, Okay, this cell hypothesis, this is a pretty

0:33:24.840 --> 0:33:30.400
<v Speaker 2>good explanation for what we now call spontaneous generation. He

0:33:30.400 --> 0:33:33.680
<v Speaker 2>didn't do anything about it. He just put it out there. Yeah,

0:33:33.720 --> 0:33:36.760
<v Speaker 2>and then along comes Louis Pasteur, who does do something

0:33:36.760 --> 0:33:40.120
<v Speaker 2>about it. He figures out a great experiment to try

0:33:40.160 --> 0:33:42.640
<v Speaker 2>to disprove spontaneous generation.

0:33:43.320 --> 0:33:47.160
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, it's pretty simple too. He basically took a broth,

0:33:48.800 --> 0:33:52.120
<v Speaker 1>put equal amounts in two different beakers. One had a

0:33:52.120 --> 0:33:54.840
<v Speaker 1>straight neck and one had an S shaped neck. He

0:33:55.280 --> 0:33:57.920
<v Speaker 1>boiled it just to make sure everything in it was killed, yea,

0:33:58.120 --> 0:33:59.800
<v Speaker 1>and then just let it sit there in the same

0:33:59.840 --> 0:34:03.680
<v Speaker 1>can conditions, open to the to the world and or

0:34:03.720 --> 0:34:06.440
<v Speaker 1>open to the room like it wasn't corked. In other words,

0:34:07.080 --> 0:34:09.960
<v Speaker 1>no court. He noticed that the one with the straight

0:34:10.040 --> 0:34:13.840
<v Speaker 1>neck eventually became cloudy and discolored, meaning there was some

0:34:13.920 --> 0:34:16.120
<v Speaker 1>junk growing in there. Yeah, and the one in the

0:34:16.160 --> 0:34:19.799
<v Speaker 1>S shape neck did not do anything. It remained the same, right,

0:34:20.360 --> 0:34:21.719
<v Speaker 1>So it led him to think.

0:34:21.560 --> 0:34:24.719
<v Speaker 2>What, well, he thought that germs, that there were such

0:34:24.760 --> 0:34:28.759
<v Speaker 2>thing as germs which leaving hook and hook had already shown. Yeah,

0:34:29.800 --> 0:34:33.520
<v Speaker 2>and that if that in the S shaped flask they

0:34:33.560 --> 0:34:37.640
<v Speaker 2>had gotten trapped in the neck, in this the open neck,

0:34:37.960 --> 0:34:41.240
<v Speaker 2>they had been able to just enter unobstructed and had

0:34:41.600 --> 0:34:44.799
<v Speaker 2>generated there. The reason that the S shape flask was

0:34:44.840 --> 0:34:47.960
<v Speaker 2>still sterile was because there is no such thing as

0:34:48.000 --> 0:34:51.759
<v Speaker 2>spontaneous generation. If there were, then no S shaped neck

0:34:51.800 --> 0:34:53.759
<v Speaker 2>would impede anything like that.

0:34:54.440 --> 0:34:55.839
<v Speaker 1>And boom, there you have it.

0:34:56.040 --> 0:35:01.120
<v Speaker 2>So he disproved that spontaneous generation is a thing.

0:35:01.080 --> 0:35:04.800
<v Speaker 1>Right, that's right through the scientific myth exactly.

0:35:05.200 --> 0:35:07.759
<v Speaker 2>Here's the leap that a lot of people make, scientists

0:35:07.760 --> 0:35:11.279
<v Speaker 2>included that really is a great disservice to science. He

0:35:11.440 --> 0:35:15.919
<v Speaker 2>didn't prove cell theory, right. What he did was take

0:35:15.960 --> 0:35:23.480
<v Speaker 2>that cell hypothesis and present some really persuasive evidence that

0:35:23.560 --> 0:35:24.680
<v Speaker 2>it's probably right.

0:35:25.400 --> 0:35:28.120
<v Speaker 1>Yeah. But like this article you sent points out, disproving

0:35:28.160 --> 0:35:30.200
<v Speaker 1>something is just as important as proving something.

0:35:30.400 --> 0:35:32.680
<v Speaker 2>So here's the thing that's the most you can hope

0:35:32.719 --> 0:35:36.080
<v Speaker 2>for with science is disproving sure with science, unless you're

0:35:36.120 --> 0:35:39.160
<v Speaker 2>talking about math. With science, there's no such thing as proof.

0:35:39.760 --> 0:35:43.000
<v Speaker 2>A theory, even a law, a universal law, still has

0:35:43.040 --> 0:35:47.040
<v Speaker 2>the potential for being undermined by one single experiment, one

0:35:47.080 --> 0:35:52.040
<v Speaker 2>single observation, and therefore there is no real ultimate proof

0:35:52.320 --> 0:35:56.600
<v Speaker 2>In science. There's just theories and support for theories, and

0:35:56.600 --> 0:36:01.799
<v Speaker 2>then ultimately laws and further and further support for laws, right,

0:36:02.239 --> 0:36:07.800
<v Speaker 2>but they're not proven. What science does ultimately is disprove

0:36:07.880 --> 0:36:12.840
<v Speaker 2>things or lend support for existing theories or existing interpretations

0:36:12.840 --> 0:36:15.719
<v Speaker 2>of why things happen the way they do. Yeah, and

0:36:15.760 --> 0:36:18.320
<v Speaker 2>that's what Pasture did. So if you look at that experiment,

0:36:18.600 --> 0:36:23.120
<v Speaker 2>he disproved spontaneous generation, but he lent support to the

0:36:23.200 --> 0:36:25.879
<v Speaker 2>cell theory, and probably with his experiment it went from

0:36:25.880 --> 0:36:28.680
<v Speaker 2>the cell hypothesis to the cell theory, right, because it

0:36:28.719 --> 0:36:32.120
<v Speaker 2>was just so persuasive. And that's what a theory is.

0:36:32.160 --> 0:36:34.239
<v Speaker 2>It means that a lot of people out there who

0:36:34.239 --> 0:36:38.919
<v Speaker 2>are reasonable say this explanation is probably the right one.

0:36:39.000 --> 0:36:40.879
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, it's predictive. If you do it over and over,

0:36:40.960 --> 0:36:42.759
<v Speaker 1>you're probably going to get the same result. Right.

0:36:43.280 --> 0:36:46.920
<v Speaker 2>But that's not to say that Pastures showed that if

0:36:46.920 --> 0:36:50.640
<v Speaker 2>you do this a million and one times that the

0:36:51.080 --> 0:36:54.520
<v Speaker 2>s shaped flask won't turn cloudy. Yeah, he didn't prove that.

0:36:54.880 --> 0:36:58.800
<v Speaker 2>You can't prove that, which is again science can disprove

0:36:59.040 --> 0:37:00.520
<v Speaker 2>and lend support can't prove.

0:37:00.960 --> 0:37:04.000
<v Speaker 1>Very good point. So right after this message break, we're

0:37:04.000 --> 0:37:06.560
<v Speaker 1>going to get into the actual steps of the scientific method.

0:37:19.360 --> 0:37:22.279
<v Speaker 1>All right, dude, I guess at long last we're there.

0:37:23.040 --> 0:37:26.960
<v Speaker 1>Like you mentioned before, the scientific method is fluid, and

0:37:27.080 --> 0:37:30.440
<v Speaker 1>it's not like when you get your science degree they

0:37:30.440 --> 0:37:34.040
<v Speaker 1>hand you a little laminated card like the Miranda rights

0:37:34.120 --> 0:37:37.200
<v Speaker 1>that cops carry that you know, list out all the

0:37:37.200 --> 0:37:41.319
<v Speaker 1>different steps you have to take. But generally maybe.

0:37:41.160 --> 0:37:43.879
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, I would we should carry those around.

0:37:43.920 --> 0:37:44.160
<v Speaker 1>All right.

0:37:44.160 --> 0:37:46.480
<v Speaker 2>We should make little wallet cars of the scientific method

0:37:46.560 --> 0:37:49.160
<v Speaker 2>just to carry stuff you should know logo on it.

0:37:49.239 --> 0:37:51.040
<v Speaker 2>Oh yeah, I'll make a million bucks.

0:37:50.840 --> 0:37:51.640
<v Speaker 1>Brand them and sell them.

0:37:51.719 --> 0:37:54.040
<v Speaker 2>Yeah.

0:37:54.239 --> 0:37:57.640
<v Speaker 1>Generally speaking, though, it follows these steps. The first thing

0:37:57.640 --> 0:37:59.960
<v Speaker 1>you do, like we mentioned earlier, is you observe something.

0:38:00.520 --> 0:38:05.080
<v Speaker 1>You ask a question next, Like Darwin was known, I

0:38:05.080 --> 0:38:07.400
<v Speaker 1>think when we did our podcast on him to he

0:38:07.400 --> 0:38:11.400
<v Speaker 1>would spend like a week on three square feet of ground.

0:38:12.520 --> 0:38:13.680
<v Speaker 2>It was like even longer than that.

0:38:13.760 --> 0:38:15.239
<v Speaker 1>Remember it was, wasn't it.

0:38:15.160 --> 0:38:17.280
<v Speaker 2>He said that he didn't he wasn't gonna Moe's lawn

0:38:17.320 --> 0:38:20.320
<v Speaker 2>for like three years because he wanted to see what happened.

0:38:20.600 --> 0:38:24.440
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, so he's the ultimate and qualitative data of just observing,

0:38:24.920 --> 0:38:28.279
<v Speaker 1>writing things down, and asking questions. And the reason you

0:38:28.320 --> 0:38:32.120
<v Speaker 1>ask your question is so you can narrow something down

0:38:32.960 --> 0:38:34.600
<v Speaker 1>like that. I think the example they use in here

0:38:34.719 --> 0:38:38.720
<v Speaker 1>is on Galapagos, like the beaks of what bird?

0:38:38.800 --> 0:38:39.520
<v Speaker 2>Was it? Finches?

0:38:39.640 --> 0:38:41.800
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, the finch bird. He noticed a bunch of different beaks,

0:38:42.360 --> 0:38:45.279
<v Speaker 1>so he finally posed a question, like, you know, I

0:38:45.320 --> 0:38:48.120
<v Speaker 1>think these beaks are different for a very specific reason,

0:38:48.520 --> 0:38:49.759
<v Speaker 1>and I aim to find out why.

0:38:50.160 --> 0:38:55.200
<v Speaker 2>Yes, he said, what caused the diversification of finches on Galapagos? Who?

0:38:56.640 --> 0:38:57.960
<v Speaker 1>You should have done that with an accent?

0:38:58.920 --> 0:39:01.920
<v Speaker 2>Well, yeah, he would have had a ritorse acent huh yeah, huh.

0:39:01.719 --> 0:39:03.479
<v Speaker 1>Unless he was pretending to be someone else.

0:39:03.840 --> 0:39:06.759
<v Speaker 2>I always think of him as like sounding like Hemingway

0:39:06.840 --> 0:39:07.280
<v Speaker 2>or something.

0:39:07.680 --> 0:39:10.120
<v Speaker 1>Oh yeah, just drunk and violent kind of.

0:39:10.800 --> 0:39:12.640
<v Speaker 2>But he wasn't. He was like the opposite of that.

0:39:13.239 --> 0:39:15.920
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, well I saw that the movie, so I picture

0:39:16.000 --> 0:39:20.560
<v Speaker 1>his voice as the dude that played him who I.

0:39:20.480 --> 0:39:22.520
<v Speaker 2>Can't remember right now, ed Norton.

0:39:22.880 --> 0:39:28.680
<v Speaker 1>No, I finally saw Birdman though, do you see that? Yeah? Yeah,

0:39:29.000 --> 0:39:30.680
<v Speaker 1>great movie.

0:39:30.960 --> 0:39:31.680
<v Speaker 2>I disagree.

0:39:31.719 --> 0:39:32.400
<v Speaker 1>Oh you didn't like it?

0:39:32.880 --> 0:39:33.200
<v Speaker 2>What?

0:39:34.320 --> 0:39:39.799
<v Speaker 1>Wow? That surprises me. We'll get into that off air.

0:39:41.280 --> 0:39:44.279
<v Speaker 1>So uh sorry, you just threw me with that.

0:39:44.640 --> 0:39:47.920
<v Speaker 2>Make an observation. Yes, he's ungalopaghost and he's like, what

0:39:48.040 --> 0:39:50.400
<v Speaker 2>the heck's with all these different finches? It's one small island.

0:39:50.719 --> 0:39:53.640
<v Speaker 2>Why would there be different species of finch? So ask

0:39:54.080 --> 0:39:58.120
<v Speaker 2>and why are they all seeming to survive and coexist?

0:39:58.239 --> 0:40:01.800
<v Speaker 2>So well, what's what? Yeah? Then he leads to the

0:40:01.880 --> 0:40:05.960
<v Speaker 2>question what's making all of these species of finches so diverse?

0:40:06.400 --> 0:40:09.439
<v Speaker 1>Right? Or Bill Harris uses a pretty good example. That's

0:40:09.680 --> 0:40:13.880
<v Speaker 1>something everyone can understand, like what car body shape is

0:40:13.920 --> 0:40:17.120
<v Speaker 1>the best for air resistance? Like one the shape like

0:40:17.160 --> 0:40:20.040
<v Speaker 1>a box, or one the shape like aerodynamic like a bird. Right,

0:40:20.239 --> 0:40:22.759
<v Speaker 1>And he carries that out In the next step. You

0:40:22.840 --> 0:40:28.640
<v Speaker 1>formulate your hypothesis based on your you know, fore knowledge

0:40:28.680 --> 0:40:32.040
<v Speaker 1>and maybe observations like so, you know what, I think

0:40:32.640 --> 0:40:34.600
<v Speaker 1>that a car shaped like a bird is probably more

0:40:34.640 --> 0:40:36.320
<v Speaker 1>aerodynamic than one shape like a box.

0:40:36.400 --> 0:40:38.080
<v Speaker 2>Yeah. If you're thinking, if you're the type of person

0:40:38.120 --> 0:40:41.880
<v Speaker 2>who's sitting around asking questions about aerodynamics, you probably already

0:40:41.960 --> 0:40:44.759
<v Speaker 2>have some sort of sense that a box is less

0:40:44.800 --> 0:40:46.080
<v Speaker 2>aerodynamic than a bird.

0:40:46.160 --> 0:40:46.520
<v Speaker 1>That's right.

0:40:46.640 --> 0:40:49.879
<v Speaker 2>Boxes rarely fly unless they're carried by one of those

0:40:49.920 --> 0:40:51.680
<v Speaker 2>delightful Amazon delivery drones.

0:40:54.200 --> 0:40:55.840
<v Speaker 1>They don't have those yet, right, They're not gonna do that,

0:40:55.880 --> 0:40:56.200
<v Speaker 1>are they.

0:40:57.239 --> 0:41:01.759
<v Speaker 2>There's like a pizza delivery drone service, man, I think

0:41:01.800 --> 0:41:05.680
<v Speaker 2>where you No, it's pizza grilled cheese in New York

0:41:05.760 --> 0:41:07.960
<v Speaker 2>and you go stand on an ax after you order

0:41:08.000 --> 0:41:09.520
<v Speaker 2>and it like comes and drops it.

0:41:09.640 --> 0:41:12.319
<v Speaker 1>That is the dumbest thing of error. And I can't

0:41:12.320 --> 0:41:13.000
<v Speaker 1>wait to do it.

0:41:13.320 --> 0:41:14.640
<v Speaker 2>But they're making a lot of money.

0:41:15.640 --> 0:41:18.400
<v Speaker 1>That's pretty funny. Yeah, we can't get food to the

0:41:18.400 --> 0:41:21.040
<v Speaker 1>homeless somehow, exactly, we can drop a grilled cheese on

0:41:21.040 --> 0:41:21.560
<v Speaker 1>someone's head.

0:41:22.000 --> 0:41:24.840
<v Speaker 2>They're like, you homeless, get off of that x exactly.

0:41:26.480 --> 0:41:29.120
<v Speaker 1>All right. So your hypothesis I don't think we ever

0:41:29.160 --> 0:41:33.040
<v Speaker 1>mentioned is typically represented as an if then statement.

0:41:33.160 --> 0:41:35.479
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, if you're doing good science, Yeah, like.

0:41:35.440 --> 0:41:42.719
<v Speaker 1>If the car's profile, well the example he uses if

0:41:42.760 --> 0:41:45.880
<v Speaker 1>the body's profile related to the amount of air it produces,

0:41:46.640 --> 0:41:48.000
<v Speaker 1>which is the more general statement.

0:41:48.080 --> 0:41:49.760
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, that's like based on a theory.

0:41:49.880 --> 0:41:51.960
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, and it's going to get more specific then the

0:41:52.000 --> 0:41:54.080
<v Speaker 1>car design, like the body of a bird will be

0:41:54.120 --> 0:41:56.720
<v Speaker 1>more aerodynamic than one like a box.

0:41:57.000 --> 0:42:00.160
<v Speaker 2>So that's inductive reasoning, starting with the broad statement and

0:42:00.239 --> 0:42:01.799
<v Speaker 2>going to something narrow.

0:42:01.800 --> 0:42:03.840
<v Speaker 1>And it's if. Then at the same time.

0:42:04.080 --> 0:42:06.680
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, and now you have a test. You have a

0:42:06.760 --> 0:42:08.800
<v Speaker 2>question that can be answered, you can figure out a

0:42:08.800 --> 0:42:09.520
<v Speaker 2>way to answer it.

0:42:09.760 --> 0:42:12.320
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, And he points out too, this is pretty important

0:42:12.360 --> 0:42:16.680
<v Speaker 1>that your hypothesis, if it's formulated correctly, means that it's

0:42:16.680 --> 0:42:19.360
<v Speaker 1>testable and it's falsifiable.

0:42:19.040 --> 0:42:22.880
<v Speaker 2>Which are often one and the same true, you know. Yeah,

0:42:22.920 --> 0:42:25.680
<v Speaker 2>And that's again we go to the people who say

0:42:25.719 --> 0:42:31.520
<v Speaker 2>that their soft sciences aren't real science, they're pseudoscience because

0:42:31.800 --> 0:42:34.160
<v Speaker 2>a lot of the data that they come up with,

0:42:34.200 --> 0:42:37.600
<v Speaker 2>a lot of the hypotheses they come up with aren't falsifiable,

0:42:37.600 --> 0:42:41.640
<v Speaker 2>they're not testable. Right, it's a thing, it's an issue,

0:42:41.920 --> 0:42:42.480
<v Speaker 2>it's a thing.

0:42:43.280 --> 0:42:46.560
<v Speaker 1>So next up in the steps, you're going to experiment.

0:42:47.320 --> 0:42:50.000
<v Speaker 1>And when you experiment, you can't just go in there

0:42:50.000 --> 0:42:52.560
<v Speaker 1>Willie Nelly and do whatever you want. You have to

0:42:52.560 --> 0:42:56.279
<v Speaker 1>set up specific conditions and they must be controlled. That's

0:42:56.400 --> 0:42:56.719
<v Speaker 1>the key.

0:42:56.920 --> 0:42:59.640
<v Speaker 2>And you want to everything that's supposed to be identical

0:42:59.760 --> 0:43:03.279
<v Speaker 2>need to be identical. So basically you have two variables.

0:43:03.320 --> 0:43:06.239
<v Speaker 2>At least you have an independent variable, yes, and you

0:43:06.280 --> 0:43:11.120
<v Speaker 2>have a dependent variable. And if you're talking about car shape,

0:43:11.360 --> 0:43:13.680
<v Speaker 2>that is the independent variable in this study.

0:43:13.800 --> 0:43:16.480
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, that's the one that's manipulated.

0:43:15.960 --> 0:43:19.160
<v Speaker 2>Exactly, it's the one you're controlling. The independent variable is

0:43:19.239 --> 0:43:22.640
<v Speaker 2>the one you, the researcher, is controlling. So in this case,

0:43:22.920 --> 0:43:26.200
<v Speaker 2>you're controlling the shape of the car. You have yourself

0:43:26.239 --> 0:43:29.040
<v Speaker 2>a bird shape car and you have yourself a box

0:43:29.080 --> 0:43:32.240
<v Speaker 2>shaped car. So the shape of the car changed because

0:43:32.320 --> 0:43:34.960
<v Speaker 2>you made it change. Now when you blast a bunch

0:43:35.040 --> 0:43:38.239
<v Speaker 2>of air over it during your experiment, what you're measuring

0:43:38.560 --> 0:43:43.640
<v Speaker 2>is the dependent variable. So you're measuring what happens based

0:43:43.680 --> 0:43:45.000
<v Speaker 2>on the change that you made.

0:43:45.280 --> 0:43:48.960
<v Speaker 1>That's right, And you want to study one single variable

0:43:48.960 --> 0:43:50.520
<v Speaker 1>at a time, basically.

0:43:50.160 --> 0:43:54.480
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, don't get fancy, just do good science, step by step, methodical.

0:43:55.000 --> 0:43:57.920
<v Speaker 1>You also have to have your control group in any experiment,

0:43:58.480 --> 0:44:02.920
<v Speaker 1>and an experimental group, and the controlled group is what's

0:44:02.960 --> 0:44:06.160
<v Speaker 1>gonna allow you to compare the test results to that

0:44:06.239 --> 0:44:09.960
<v Speaker 1>baseline measurement. Yeah, and you need that baseline measurement, so

0:44:10.680 --> 0:44:12.280
<v Speaker 1>it's not just like chance.

0:44:12.400 --> 0:44:15.520
<v Speaker 2>Basically, exactly, like if Pasture had just done the S

0:44:15.520 --> 0:44:19.040
<v Speaker 2>shaped neck and nothing happened. Right, he wouldn't have necessarily

0:44:19.560 --> 0:44:21.879
<v Speaker 2>been able to say that he was right even though

0:44:21.920 --> 0:44:24.960
<v Speaker 2>he was right. He needed that control, which was the

0:44:25.120 --> 0:44:26.600
<v Speaker 2>open flask, right.

0:44:26.800 --> 0:44:29.080
<v Speaker 1>Or with the cars, you need two cars, like you said,

0:44:29.520 --> 0:44:31.759
<v Speaker 1>one bird shaped and one box shaped.

0:44:31.640 --> 0:44:33.960
<v Speaker 2>Right, Or then maybe in this case, since the bird

0:44:33.960 --> 0:44:36.120
<v Speaker 2>shape and the box shape both show up in the hypothsis,

0:44:36.120 --> 0:44:39.120
<v Speaker 2>you'd need a third like egg shaped one or something

0:44:39.239 --> 0:44:39.600
<v Speaker 2>like that.

0:44:39.840 --> 0:44:41.520
<v Speaker 1>Oh, I bet that would be pretty streamlined.

0:44:42.600 --> 0:44:44.320
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, yeah, yeah.

0:44:44.360 --> 0:44:47.080
<v Speaker 1>But the key though, is all of those variables have

0:44:47.200 --> 0:44:49.560
<v Speaker 1>to be All the other variables have to be the same,

0:44:50.200 --> 0:44:52.080
<v Speaker 1>like you have to have them. They have to be

0:44:52.120 --> 0:44:54.040
<v Speaker 1>the same weight, they have to be painted the same,

0:44:55.080 --> 0:44:58.640
<v Speaker 1>the tires, everything, the windows. One can't have an antenna

0:44:58.680 --> 0:45:00.600
<v Speaker 1>on the other, knot. They've all they got to be

0:45:00.640 --> 0:45:02.960
<v Speaker 1>identical other than the one variable.

0:45:02.640 --> 0:45:05.480
<v Speaker 2>Right, the independent variable that you're that's the one you

0:45:05.520 --> 0:45:07.960
<v Speaker 2>want different. Everything else you want the same or else

0:45:08.040 --> 0:45:11.480
<v Speaker 2>as possible that Oh well, this one had bigger tires,

0:45:11.520 --> 0:45:13.880
<v Speaker 2>so that actually made it more aerodynamic.

0:45:14.000 --> 0:45:16.160
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, and you're just doing yourself a favor by doing

0:45:16.200 --> 0:45:18.279
<v Speaker 1>all that stuff. Yeah, you know, you want to rule

0:45:18.280 --> 0:45:20.120
<v Speaker 1>out everything else but that one variable.

0:45:20.200 --> 0:45:20.399
<v Speaker 2>Yep.

0:45:21.880 --> 0:45:25.880
<v Speaker 1>After that you want to analyze your data so you

0:45:25.880 --> 0:45:30.640
<v Speaker 1>can draw your conclusion. And sometimes it's kind of straightforward

0:45:30.680 --> 0:45:33.200
<v Speaker 1>and easy. Sometimes takes a lot of work and a

0:45:33.239 --> 0:45:36.439
<v Speaker 1>lot of various tools. Yes, draw it out.

0:45:36.600 --> 0:45:40.800
<v Speaker 2>Let's say you're just blasting a car in a wind tunnel. Yeah,

0:45:40.880 --> 0:45:44.920
<v Speaker 2>you're measuring the wind resistance using certain awesome instruments and

0:45:44.960 --> 0:45:47.600
<v Speaker 2>that kind of stuff, and you're taking that data, and

0:45:47.640 --> 0:45:49.719
<v Speaker 2>then afterward you're going to analyze it. You're going to

0:45:49.800 --> 0:45:53.240
<v Speaker 2>compare the data that you gathered from the bird shaped

0:45:53.280 --> 0:45:56.239
<v Speaker 2>car the box shaped car, and then the control the

0:45:56.280 --> 0:45:58.239
<v Speaker 2>egg shaped car. Right, You're going to compare them, and

0:45:58.280 --> 0:46:01.160
<v Speaker 2>you're going to say, well, the wind resistance was less

0:46:01.719 --> 0:46:05.120
<v Speaker 2>for the bird shaped car than the box shaped car,

0:46:05.200 --> 0:46:09.600
<v Speaker 2>which means that my hypothesis was correct.

0:46:09.280 --> 0:46:11.880
<v Speaker 1>Right, and here all the data points, whereas Louis pasteor

0:46:11.920 --> 0:46:14.640
<v Speaker 1>could just say, look at the beakers exactly.

0:46:15.160 --> 0:46:17.960
<v Speaker 2>Don't be an idiot. Yeah, I'm a scientist.

0:46:18.040 --> 0:46:22.000
<v Speaker 1>That one's got gross stuff. You can see it, right.

0:46:22.080 --> 0:46:25.799
<v Speaker 2>But the other thing about science, too, Chuck, ideally, is

0:46:25.880 --> 0:46:29.360
<v Speaker 2>let's say that egg shaped one turned out the control

0:46:29.400 --> 0:46:33.040
<v Speaker 2>group turned out to have better wind resistance than anything. Well,

0:46:33.080 --> 0:46:36.000
<v Speaker 2>just by virtue of carrying out this experiment correctly, you

0:46:36.000 --> 0:46:40.160
<v Speaker 2>would have stumbled upon an even better aerodynamic design, and

0:46:40.200 --> 0:46:42.880
<v Speaker 2>you would have come up with that little egg shaped

0:46:42.880 --> 0:46:45.719
<v Speaker 2>Mercedes suv. Yeah, that was so huge, just like ten

0:46:45.800 --> 0:46:46.520
<v Speaker 2>years ago.

0:46:46.560 --> 0:46:49.680
<v Speaker 1>The Mercedes egg right coming to a store near you.

0:46:50.080 --> 0:46:53.880
<v Speaker 2>So that's a big, big part of the scientific method

0:46:54.000 --> 0:47:02.279
<v Speaker 2>is carrying out a an experiment, control the variables, analyzing

0:47:02.320 --> 0:47:05.360
<v Speaker 2>the data. And then there's a step that he missed

0:47:05.360 --> 0:47:09.360
<v Speaker 2>that is very rarely part of a scientific method list.

0:47:09.560 --> 0:47:12.800
<v Speaker 2>Oh yeah, that is to share your data. Oh sure,

0:47:12.840 --> 0:47:15.520
<v Speaker 2>and this is a huge problem with science right now.

0:47:15.760 --> 0:47:18.759
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, the article you sent was really eye opening. Scientific

0:47:18.800 --> 0:47:21.360
<v Speaker 1>research has changed the world. Now it needs to change itself.

0:47:21.440 --> 0:47:24.080
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, it's an economist article. It's up on the internet.

0:47:24.200 --> 0:47:28.240
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, it was kind of scary that it's I mean,

0:47:28.400 --> 0:47:31.000
<v Speaker 1>here's some of the data he points out is one

0:47:31.040 --> 0:47:35.320
<v Speaker 1>rule of thumb among biotech venture capitalists is about half

0:47:35.680 --> 0:47:39.719
<v Speaker 1>fifty percent of published research can't even be replicated. And

0:47:39.719 --> 0:47:43.160
<v Speaker 1>a biotech firm, Amjin, found that they could reproduce only

0:47:43.239 --> 0:47:46.880
<v Speaker 1>six of their fifty three landmark studies in cancer research.

0:47:47.440 --> 0:47:50.960
<v Speaker 1>So you can't repeat these things. It's like everyone's fighting

0:47:51.000 --> 0:47:54.440
<v Speaker 1>for dollars in fame, and maybe not fame, but to

0:47:54.520 --> 0:47:57.919
<v Speaker 1>some of our career advancement, sure such that they're kind

0:47:57.920 --> 0:47:59.960
<v Speaker 1>of not doing that final step any longer.

0:48:00.280 --> 0:48:03.919
<v Speaker 2>No, and it's not necessarily just them, it's the other

0:48:04.080 --> 0:48:07.360
<v Speaker 2>scientists aren't going back and saying, well, let me see

0:48:07.520 --> 0:48:11.200
<v Speaker 2>if your results are reproducible. People are just taking it

0:48:11.239 --> 0:48:14.520
<v Speaker 2>on faith. We need another Roger Bacon to come along

0:48:14.520 --> 0:48:17.120
<v Speaker 2>and be like, dude, we can't just blindly accept that

0:48:17.320 --> 0:48:20.400
<v Speaker 2>one person carried out this one study and then just

0:48:20.480 --> 0:48:23.799
<v Speaker 2>go do clinical trials on it without anybody reproducing it

0:48:23.840 --> 0:48:27.600
<v Speaker 2>to see if the results can be verified independently.

0:48:27.760 --> 0:48:30.520
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, because, and this is a good time to mention bias.

0:48:30.560 --> 0:48:33.600
<v Speaker 1>There is such a thing as bias, and it still happens.

0:48:34.719 --> 0:48:40.040
<v Speaker 1>A scientist is usually out to prove something or disprove

0:48:40.120 --> 0:48:44.719
<v Speaker 1>something that they want a specific result. Like even if

0:48:44.760 --> 0:48:48.759
<v Speaker 1>you're super open minded, you're probably hoping to disprove or

0:48:48.800 --> 0:48:52.480
<v Speaker 1>prove something one way or the other, and your confirmation

0:48:52.600 --> 0:48:55.319
<v Speaker 1>bias might you know, even if you don't think you're

0:48:55.320 --> 0:48:58.399
<v Speaker 1>doing it, you might nudge out some results that don't

0:48:58.400 --> 0:49:01.600
<v Speaker 1>support your hypothesis, and so you won't make it into

0:49:01.680 --> 0:49:07.719
<v Speaker 1>that awesome journal which this author points out that journals

0:49:07.760 --> 0:49:13.800
<v Speaker 1>need to start putting in what he calls uninteresting results

0:49:13.800 --> 0:49:17.520
<v Speaker 1>in experiments, right, or like the stuff that's not sexy, right, or.

0:49:17.560 --> 0:49:21.720
<v Speaker 2>Studies that failed to show that their hypothesis was correct.

0:49:21.840 --> 0:49:23.000
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, stuff is disproved.

0:49:23.040 --> 0:49:26.359
<v Speaker 2>Those things still need to well not even disproved. Well, yeah,

0:49:26.360 --> 0:49:28.319
<v Speaker 2>I guess it is disproved. But yes, like the guy

0:49:28.360 --> 0:49:32.960
<v Speaker 2>set out to say, like that a red balloon uses

0:49:33.040 --> 0:49:36.279
<v Speaker 2>less helium than a silver balloon and it turns out

0:49:36.280 --> 0:49:38.799
<v Speaker 2>that no, they use the same amount of helium. Well,

0:49:38.880 --> 0:49:42.200
<v Speaker 2>if that study gets published and put out there into

0:49:42.280 --> 0:49:46.040
<v Speaker 2>the scientific literature on helium and balloons, then it's going

0:49:46.120 --> 0:49:49.480
<v Speaker 2>to prevent some other scientists down the road from wasting time, money,

0:49:49.520 --> 0:49:54.400
<v Speaker 2>and helium, which, as you'll remember, is an increasingly needed commodity.

0:49:55.520 --> 0:49:59.880
<v Speaker 2>By carrying out the same experiment, whether the results are

0:50:00.200 --> 0:50:03.080
<v Speaker 2>positive or negative or what, the study is meant to

0:50:03.120 --> 0:50:05.479
<v Speaker 2>be shared. And that's the point of the scientific method

0:50:05.600 --> 0:50:08.279
<v Speaker 2>is to reduce bias, right, And if you follow it

0:50:08.320 --> 0:50:10.920
<v Speaker 2>all the way through ideally and do all of the steps,

0:50:10.920 --> 0:50:15.319
<v Speaker 2>including share your research whether it's happy or sad, then

0:50:15.960 --> 0:50:19.319
<v Speaker 2>science benefits. The world benefits, and by not doing that,

0:50:19.440 --> 0:50:21.160
<v Speaker 2>the world does not benefit.

0:50:21.320 --> 0:50:24.920
<v Speaker 1>Yeah. He points out that these days only fourteen percent

0:50:24.960 --> 0:50:29.799
<v Speaker 1>of published papers are quote unquote negative results, and it

0:50:29.880 --> 0:50:33.680
<v Speaker 1>used to be like thirty percent or more. And he says,

0:50:33.719 --> 0:50:35.160
<v Speaker 1>because it's a lot of it has to do with

0:50:35.239 --> 0:50:40.279
<v Speaker 1>this sort of you know, getting in these journals and

0:50:40.280 --> 0:50:43.040
<v Speaker 1>you're the rockstar scientist and this study is super sexy.

0:50:43.560 --> 0:50:45.319
<v Speaker 1>Like if they kind of quit going that route and

0:50:45.320 --> 0:50:48.759
<v Speaker 1>made it what it should be, then research dollars would

0:50:48.800 --> 0:50:52.480
<v Speaker 1>be better spent and people could, you know, he said,

0:50:52.520 --> 0:50:54.560
<v Speaker 1>the peer reviewed thing isn't even all it's cracked up.

0:50:54.480 --> 0:50:57.120
<v Speaker 2>To be, I know. He mentions a study from a

0:50:57.160 --> 0:51:00.759
<v Speaker 2>medical journal that gave a bunch of peer reviewers some

0:51:00.840 --> 0:51:05.800
<v Speaker 2>stuff with deliberate errors inserted into the research, into the studies,

0:51:06.160 --> 0:51:08.160
<v Speaker 2>and even when they were told that they were being

0:51:08.239 --> 0:51:10.560
<v Speaker 2>tested to find this, they still missed.

0:51:10.320 --> 0:51:11.880
<v Speaker 1>A lot of it. Yeah.

0:51:12.120 --> 0:51:14.680
<v Speaker 2>So yeah, the science needs to kind of reevaluate the

0:51:14.719 --> 0:51:18.360
<v Speaker 2>way it's carrying out science. It's not science. The problem

0:51:19.000 --> 0:51:21.879
<v Speaker 2>isn't science itself. The problem isn't the scientific method. It's

0:51:21.880 --> 0:51:24.040
<v Speaker 2>the way that it's being used or not followed through.

0:51:24.239 --> 0:51:26.040
<v Speaker 2>And a lot of it has to do with academia

0:51:26.080 --> 0:51:27.440
<v Speaker 2>and the people funding science.

0:51:27.640 --> 0:51:29.640
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, and he said, you know, these days there's up

0:51:29.760 --> 0:51:33.360
<v Speaker 1>seven million researchers, and back in the day, even in

0:51:33.440 --> 0:51:36.959
<v Speaker 1>like the nineteen fifties, there were like a few thousand maybe, right,

0:51:37.040 --> 0:51:39.839
<v Speaker 1>So there's just a lot of career competition, he calls

0:51:39.840 --> 0:51:43.600
<v Speaker 1>it careerism. And so you fake a result or too,

0:51:43.719 --> 0:51:46.440
<v Speaker 1>or you just nudge out some results that don't support

0:51:46.440 --> 0:51:50.160
<v Speaker 1>your hypothesis. Yes, you want the bigger paycheck or the

0:51:50.160 --> 0:51:53.360
<v Speaker 1>fame or notoriety, and all of a sudden, science is

0:51:53.440 --> 0:51:58.560
<v Speaker 1>not science. Yeah, you know, it's pseudoscience exactly.

0:51:59.400 --> 0:52:02.120
<v Speaker 2>And speaking of pseudoscience, I think we've reached the point

0:52:02.120 --> 0:52:05.680
<v Speaker 2>where we should talk about the limitations of the scientific method,

0:52:06.080 --> 0:52:09.480
<v Speaker 2>because it does have its limits, right, like the way

0:52:09.520 --> 0:52:11.840
<v Speaker 2>that the scientific method is set up, especially if you

0:52:11.920 --> 0:52:16.520
<v Speaker 2>go through if you include falsification, which most scientists now

0:52:16.600 --> 0:52:21.200
<v Speaker 2>say is a thing like falsifiability of your hypothesis means

0:52:21.239 --> 0:52:24.960
<v Speaker 2>that you have a real scientific hypothesis the if it

0:52:25.000 --> 0:52:28.840
<v Speaker 2>can be disproven by some observation or some measurement or whatever,

0:52:29.040 --> 0:52:32.839
<v Speaker 2>then it's falsifiable. And if it's not falsifiable, then it's

0:52:32.880 --> 0:52:36.960
<v Speaker 2>not really science. So the thing is for something to

0:52:37.000 --> 0:52:39.399
<v Speaker 2>be falsifiable, and it was actually a philosopher that came

0:52:39.480 --> 0:52:42.120
<v Speaker 2>up with the concept of falsification a guy named Carl

0:52:42.160 --> 0:52:45.359
<v Speaker 2>Popper in the nineteen thirties, and he was the one

0:52:45.360 --> 0:52:48.600
<v Speaker 2>that said, like, you have to be able to falsify

0:52:48.680 --> 0:52:52.520
<v Speaker 2>something for it to be disproven or supported, and if not,

0:52:52.600 --> 0:52:56.279
<v Speaker 2>then it's pseudoscience. Well, part and parcel of that is

0:52:56.320 --> 0:52:58.440
<v Speaker 2>that what you're saying has to be able to be

0:52:58.560 --> 0:53:03.240
<v Speaker 2>detected rially, there's some way that has to the presence

0:53:03.280 --> 0:53:06.360
<v Speaker 2>of it has to be measured or inferred. And so

0:53:06.640 --> 0:53:10.239
<v Speaker 2>a lot of people say, well, then with the scientific

0:53:10.320 --> 0:53:14.399
<v Speaker 2>method it reaches the limits of its current usefulness when

0:53:14.400 --> 0:53:18.520
<v Speaker 2>it tries to explain the supernatural. When somebody says.

0:53:18.120 --> 0:53:20.960
<v Speaker 1>Like, ghosts are real, exactly.

0:53:20.960 --> 0:53:24.719
<v Speaker 2>You can't prove that, well, you also can't disprove it either, right,

0:53:25.000 --> 0:53:30.640
<v Speaker 2>And so if you are a scientist who says, because

0:53:30.719 --> 0:53:34.759
<v Speaker 2>the scientific method can't prove or disprove the existence of

0:53:34.800 --> 0:53:38.440
<v Speaker 2>ghosts or God, there is no such thing as ghosts

0:53:38.520 --> 0:53:42.440
<v Speaker 2>or God, you're making a leap of faith just as

0:53:42.480 --> 0:53:45.359
<v Speaker 2>much as the same person who says science can't prove

0:53:45.440 --> 0:53:48.720
<v Speaker 2>or disprove the existence of ghosts or God, therefore God's

0:53:48.760 --> 0:53:52.200
<v Speaker 2>and ghosts are real. They're both leaps of faith, and

0:53:52.239 --> 0:53:55.880
<v Speaker 2>that really the most scientific approach to the existence of

0:53:55.920 --> 0:53:59.600
<v Speaker 2>the supernatural, whether it is ghost or God, is that

0:53:59.640 --> 0:54:03.200
<v Speaker 2>we see simply don't know, and that we cannot know scientifically.

0:54:03.960 --> 0:54:07.120
<v Speaker 2>But that doesn't mean that it does exist or doesn't exist, right,

0:54:07.280 --> 0:54:10.160
<v Speaker 2>And that's saying that science shows that it does or

0:54:10.160 --> 0:54:14.040
<v Speaker 2>doesn't exist is by definition the opposite of what science shows.

0:54:14.480 --> 0:54:19.600
<v Speaker 2>Science shows neither. It's not capable of showing or showing

0:54:19.600 --> 0:54:20.840
<v Speaker 2>that something doesn't exist.

0:54:20.920 --> 0:54:23.920
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, that's a good point. The other place where science

0:54:23.920 --> 0:54:27.640
<v Speaker 1>can get corrupted is when it blurs the lines, or

0:54:27.680 --> 0:54:32.520
<v Speaker 1>when people blur the lines between moral judgments and science

0:54:33.360 --> 0:54:36.960
<v Speaker 1>value judgments. Like you can study global warming, you can

0:54:36.960 --> 0:54:40.520
<v Speaker 1>study cause and effect, you can report data, but when

0:54:40.520 --> 0:54:44.520
<v Speaker 1>you make that secondly to say, and this is a scientist,

0:54:44.600 --> 0:54:46.359
<v Speaker 1>I mean someone can come along and say global warming

0:54:46.440 --> 0:54:49.279
<v Speaker 1>is bad, you shouldn't drive your suv. That's fine, But

0:54:49.520 --> 0:54:52.960
<v Speaker 1>a scientist can't do a study and say that, because

0:54:53.000 --> 0:54:58.440
<v Speaker 1>that's a value judgment. And that's where science can get corrupted.

0:54:58.440 --> 0:55:01.920
<v Speaker 1>Pretty much. You can you can study glow warming and

0:55:01.960 --> 0:55:05.680
<v Speaker 1>results till the cows come home, but you can't assert

0:55:05.840 --> 0:55:09.040
<v Speaker 1>that if you use this light bulb you're a bad person.

0:55:09.160 --> 0:55:13.439
<v Speaker 2>Right, or ocean and acidification is bad. It's not good

0:55:13.440 --> 0:55:16.480
<v Speaker 2>for humans. But if you're a jellyfish is awesome, right

0:55:16.560 --> 0:55:19.520
<v Speaker 2>you know? So yes, And again you made a great point.

0:55:19.719 --> 0:55:24.600
<v Speaker 2>It's not science, it's people using science to make value judgments.

0:55:24.680 --> 0:55:24.879
<v Speaker 1>Yeah.

0:55:25.320 --> 0:55:29.040
<v Speaker 2>So it ultimately the scientific method, although it does have

0:55:29.200 --> 0:55:33.919
<v Speaker 2>its limitations in that it needs empirical data to prove

0:55:34.000 --> 0:55:38.600
<v Speaker 2>or disprove something. It's not. It's not flawed. That's not

0:55:38.640 --> 0:55:42.279
<v Speaker 2>a flaw. That's a limitation, and it's it's when it's

0:55:42.560 --> 0:55:47.160
<v Speaker 2>misused then it's results become flawed or skewed. And that's

0:55:47.200 --> 0:55:49.080
<v Speaker 2>the people doing it, man, not science.

0:55:49.239 --> 0:55:49.680
<v Speaker 1>That's right.

0:55:49.760 --> 0:55:51.200
<v Speaker 2>It's pretty interesting stuff.

0:55:51.320 --> 0:55:52.640
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, man, this is a good one.

0:55:52.840 --> 0:55:53.560
<v Speaker 2>I thought so too.

0:55:53.600 --> 0:55:56.600
<v Speaker 1>Man, let it start out with a bang boom. It's

0:55:56.640 --> 0:55:57.839
<v Speaker 1>all downhill from here.

0:55:59.040 --> 0:56:01.919
<v Speaker 2>If you want to know more about scientific method, check

0:56:01.960 --> 0:56:06.000
<v Speaker 2>out that article on the Economists, check out explorables, and

0:56:06.040 --> 0:56:08.560
<v Speaker 2>then of course, check out the scientific method in the

0:56:08.560 --> 0:56:11.560
<v Speaker 2>search bar at HowStuffWorks dot com. And since I said that,

0:56:11.680 --> 0:56:13.920
<v Speaker 2>it's time for listener mail.

0:56:16.000 --> 0:56:20.520
<v Speaker 1>That's right. But quickly before listener mail, we get asked

0:56:20.560 --> 0:56:23.399
<v Speaker 1>by listeners all the time, what can we do since

0:56:23.400 --> 0:56:25.480
<v Speaker 1>you have a free podcast. We can't pay for it.

0:56:25.800 --> 0:56:28.319
<v Speaker 1>What can we do to help you, guys? And one

0:56:28.320 --> 0:56:32.000
<v Speaker 1>thing you can do that we would appreciate is go

0:56:32.080 --> 0:56:34.920
<v Speaker 1>to iTunes and leave a rating in a review for us.

0:56:35.400 --> 0:56:38.520
<v Speaker 1>That makes it big, big difference in keeping us up

0:56:38.520 --> 0:56:41.360
<v Speaker 1>there in the rankings, which means more people find stuff

0:56:41.360 --> 0:56:45.400
<v Speaker 1>you should know after they listen to Cereal, they'll just say, well, geez,

0:56:45.400 --> 0:56:46.399
<v Speaker 1>there's other podcasts in.

0:56:46.360 --> 0:56:49.239
<v Speaker 2>The world, what is this podcast?

0:56:49.840 --> 0:56:52.400
<v Speaker 1>So ratings and reviews really help us out and it

0:56:52.440 --> 0:56:55.440
<v Speaker 1>doesn't cost you anything but a few minutes. Be honest.

0:56:55.440 --> 0:56:57.759
<v Speaker 1>We're not saying go leave us some great review, but

0:56:58.040 --> 0:57:02.319
<v Speaker 1>go leave us a great review. You said it and

0:57:02.400 --> 0:57:04.320
<v Speaker 1>told tell one person about stuff you should know. We

0:57:04.360 --> 0:57:07.400
<v Speaker 1>would appreciate that too. Turn somebody onto the show, and

0:57:08.640 --> 0:57:10.799
<v Speaker 1>that's it. That's our version of a pledge drive.

0:57:11.640 --> 0:57:14.360
<v Speaker 2>They wow, we did that once every three years. No,

0:57:14.800 --> 0:57:17.880
<v Speaker 2>not very obnoxious and it lasts forty seconds.

0:57:18.000 --> 0:57:19.919
<v Speaker 1>All right, So on to listener mail. This is from

0:57:19.920 --> 0:57:20.720
<v Speaker 1>my sister in law.

0:57:20.760 --> 0:57:23.240
<v Speaker 2>Actually, oh yeah, there's some nepotism.

0:57:23.400 --> 0:57:28.360
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, Jenny. Jenny Bryant, she mentioned in the homeschool episode

0:57:28.360 --> 0:57:31.960
<v Speaker 1>homeschooled her kids for a little while and she sort

0:57:31.960 --> 0:57:35.560
<v Speaker 1>of corrected me. Loved the homeschooling episode. Guys. One very

0:57:35.560 --> 0:57:40.640
<v Speaker 1>big trend these days in the homeschooling community is what Abby,

0:57:40.760 --> 0:57:44.640
<v Speaker 1>my niece does, which is hybrid homeschooling. So two to

0:57:44.680 --> 0:57:47.520
<v Speaker 1>three days a week she is at school and then

0:57:47.680 --> 0:57:50.320
<v Speaker 1>the rest of the time she is a plant. She's

0:57:50.320 --> 0:57:52.920
<v Speaker 1>not a plant. The rest of the time she's a

0:57:52.960 --> 0:57:55.280
<v Speaker 1>home So she says it's a great option with curriculum

0:57:55.320 --> 0:57:58.480
<v Speaker 1>provided and new topics ought at school and then worked

0:57:58.520 --> 0:58:01.960
<v Speaker 1>out at home. Any of these schools are accredited making

0:58:02.040 --> 0:58:06.160
<v Speaker 1>getting into college, including Ivy League schools, hassel Free and

0:58:06.400 --> 0:58:10.280
<v Speaker 1>Abby School has sports teams, homecoming. Abby's actually an excellent

0:58:10.360 --> 0:58:14.560
<v Speaker 1>volleyball player. Yeah, Beta club, newspaper staff, all the good stuff.

0:58:15.120 --> 0:58:17.600
<v Speaker 1>The flexibility is great for families, and we are huge

0:58:17.600 --> 0:58:20.760
<v Speaker 1>fans of how the hybrid approach prepares students for college

0:58:21.000 --> 0:58:23.440
<v Speaker 1>by allowing them time outside of class to manage their

0:58:23.480 --> 0:58:24.640
<v Speaker 1>work and life schedules.

0:58:25.360 --> 0:58:30.000
<v Speaker 2>So that's from Jenny Nice. It's actually Jenny via text over.

0:58:30.000 --> 0:58:31.800
<v Speaker 1>The first listener mail via text.

0:58:31.800 --> 0:58:34.320
<v Speaker 2>How did you print that out? Did you retype it

0:58:34.360 --> 0:58:38.200
<v Speaker 2>and print it? Oh dude, are you serious? You can

0:58:38.240 --> 0:58:39.120
<v Speaker 2>print from texts?

0:58:39.240 --> 0:58:42.000
<v Speaker 1>No, you just copy pasted to an email.

0:58:42.040 --> 0:58:44.800
<v Speaker 2>Oh oh yeah, yeah, I forgot about that method. How

0:58:44.880 --> 0:58:48.600
<v Speaker 2>in the world did you do that with your thoughts?

0:58:49.240 --> 0:58:52.120
<v Speaker 2>I have a niece who is excellent at volleyball too.

0:58:52.200 --> 0:58:52.840
<v Speaker 2>Oh yeah, how old?

0:58:52.880 --> 0:58:55.360
<v Speaker 1>We should get them together, James, I don't know ten

0:58:55.400 --> 0:58:58.200
<v Speaker 1>to eleven, Okay, something like that. Abby just turned thirteen,

0:58:58.280 --> 0:58:59.040
<v Speaker 1>so they're.

0:58:59.000 --> 0:59:00.920
<v Speaker 2>Oh, maybe they face all up against one another.

0:59:01.000 --> 0:59:02.120
<v Speaker 1>Yeah. Is she in Atlanta?

0:59:02.760 --> 0:59:06.120
<v Speaker 2>Yes, she's up in Canton. You never know where's Abby.

0:59:06.560 --> 0:59:09.000
<v Speaker 1>She's in Roswell. But they I think with volleyball they

0:59:09.080 --> 0:59:10.960
<v Speaker 1>kind of have played all over the state.

0:59:11.040 --> 0:59:12.520
<v Speaker 2>It'd be bizarre if they play each other.

0:59:12.640 --> 0:59:14.560
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, we'll just see each other at a match one day,

0:59:15.040 --> 0:59:17.320
<v Speaker 1>on opposite sides of the court with our arms folded.

0:59:17.440 --> 0:59:19.840
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, what else?

0:59:20.320 --> 0:59:21.200
<v Speaker 1>I got nothing else?

0:59:21.360 --> 0:59:24.560
<v Speaker 2>Well, like Chuck said, go leave us a review. And

0:59:24.800 --> 0:59:26.320
<v Speaker 2>if you want to get in touch with us, you

0:59:26.360 --> 0:59:29.640
<v Speaker 2>can tweet to us at sysk podcast. You can join

0:59:29.760 --> 0:59:32.360
<v Speaker 2>us on Facebook, dot com, slash Stuff you Should Know.

0:59:32.880 --> 0:59:37.000
<v Speaker 2>You can email us, We still do that. Yeah, you

0:59:37.040 --> 0:59:41.400
<v Speaker 2>can't text me and stuff podcast at HowStuffWorks dot com

0:59:41.440 --> 0:59:43.479
<v Speaker 2>and has always joined us at our home on the web,

0:59:43.640 --> 0:59:50.920
<v Speaker 2>Stuff you Should Know dot com For more on this,

0:59:51.000 --> 1:00:01.280
<v Speaker 2>and thousands of other topics. Visit HowStuffWorks dot com.