Scientific Ego

Does anyone else ever get tired of things being indicated and/or revealed by studies. Seems that every time I open a newspaper or website, I find a published result of some 'recent experiments' or 'five-year study'. The sources of these range from universities to private institutions (read: lots of people with nothing better to do) and the ultimate purpose seems to be overturning things that generations of humanity have until now accepted as fact.

A lot of these are diet related. Depending on who you listen to, you could very well believe that green vegetables could be bad for you, while chocolate and alcohol might actually be beneficial. I know I'm generalizing here, but the fact is that the average person DOES generalize. If you start your report by saying: "Lettuce can give you cancer," I can't promise that I'm going to read every last page of it, but I guarantee I'll think twice before buying my next package of Romaine Hearts at the supermarket.

It was bad enough when Pluto was demoted from 'planet' status to...whatever the heck it's supposed to be. Now, I am the first to admit that I am no scientist; I don't know what their system of measurement is, or what the qualifying criteria for a planet might be, or especially why they think this sort of thing matters to the general public in the first place. I will say that I do feel bad for Pluto being summarily removed from its heretofore special status as the outer guardian of the solar system, particularly as it seems to have been denied one our society's fundamental rights, that of being able to face one's accuser in court.

Now, along the same lines, I hear that the Triceratops may not have actually existed. What, then, are these skeletons that have haunted museum hallways for the past century or more? It's not like they're debunking the Gorgonops or the Shuvuula (both actual dinosaur names, by the way); the Trikey is one of the most famous pre-historic creatures that I can name. Even before Jurassic Park brought names like "Velociraptor" and "Procompsognathus" and "Jeff Goldblum" into the popular lexicon, everyone knew what the three-horned one was called. Except now, some 'scientists' have announced that it's just a juvenile version of the Torosaurus. That's right, the famous Torosaurus...the one you'd never even heard of until you read that sentence.

Well I, for one, am not giving in to this anymore. The fact is, none of these people have ever visited Pluto, seen a living dinosaur, or gone on a diet. The fact is, their conclusions are based on hypothesis and experiment leading ultimately to a theory that is ONLY considered true if a substantial number of leading experts accept it...the same way that old atomic models and theories of the universe were just as 'true' as the ones today. When new facts emerge, new theories are required.

Thus the conclusion: no one actually knows what they're talking about. Science and religion, which many believe to be totally incompatible, actually converge at the point that SOME basic, un-provable premises must be accepted before anything can be definitively stated. Newton's three laws of motion, for instance, are the foundation of modern physics...but they are only 'LAWS' at all because they've yet to be disproved. As scientific history indicates, what is true today may be false tomorrow.

As for me, I will continue to admire the Triceratops skeleton in the museum and even hope to one day visit the planet Pluto. I may start avoiding lettuce, though. That stuff's nasty.