Rejecting factual in favor of theoretical ends credibility
In his August 29 letter to the Daily Bee, Jack DeBaun reaffirmed his misguided belief that science doesn’t prove anything. But in doing so, he has opened himself up to continuous, easy, and painfully brutal rebuttal. Any time in the future that he invokes science to support his claims, we can simply remind him that science doesn’t prove anything. He said so himself.
The reality is, there is factual science and there is theoretical science.
Factual science actually does prove things. (Example: water boils at 100 degrees Celsius.) But theoretical science postulates various reasons for things without reaching a final conclusion. There is a huge difference, but the theoretical becomes “junk science” when it ignores or denies the factual.
Jack also makes it apparent that he knows little to nothing about logic. It is not a logical fallacy, as he mistakenly claims, to ask for proof that an outrageous and unbelievable claim is true. And dogmatically making a claim that one cannot prove is less than honest. Chicken Little said the sky was falling, but had no proof whatsoever.
So it is with the 97% scientific consensus claim. Since he introduced that idea here in this letters column, it is entirely up to him to prove it. But he won’t because he can’t, and believing it without proof is merely an act of faith.
We need both aspects of science. By rejecting factual in favor of theoretical, Jack DeBaun has lost credibility. Sorry Jack, but you sank your own ship.