The Flat Earth Society
Other Discussion Boards => Technology, Science & Alt Science => Topic started by: Thevoiceofreason on June 21, 2010, 02:11:37 PM
-
ok pretend you are a Zet doctor.
Answer either of the three cases, they are
CASE I
your patient has a frequent history of nose bleeds, and develops internal bleeding, what do you treat for if you cannot form the hypothesis that it is caused by _____, the obvious choice.
CASE II
your female patients has three children that are not genetically related to her at all, yet you have overwhelming evidence that she they were all born naturally. She has had intercourse and carried the children to term on three separate occasions, all of which are verified by family, OBGYNS, the general practitioner, etc.
CASE III
your patient comes in with a strange symptom. he has been shot in the head, and he has uncontrollable laughter, and has passed out and is bleeding from his facial orifices. his home environment consists of a small plantation of marijuana and a cesspool beside it. his AC unit is also contaminated with bacteria, which tests to be Legionaires. Zets have reason to test this bacteria as well as Scientists, so the playing field is level. simultaneously, he gains cortical blindness and increased sensitivity to pain. one of the visiting family members (non related by blood) comes down with the initial symptoms, but rapidly progresses faster than the original patient...what the heck do Zets do? There are over 10 possibilities to test for, but not enough evidence to swing either way. They cannot create a hypothesis like the scientists, so wat do? solving for what type of substance/organism the cause might be will allow you to narrow the range well enough to test and treat within the time constraint.
-
???
What in the world are you talking about?
-
Oh reason...
The people who follow Zeteticsim don't come here. Those who do and say they follow zeteticsim are trolls or DAs.
-
???
What in the world are you talking about?
Simple. I'm trying to figure out how a Zeteticism matches with Science. Medicine is a proven science, but Zetetic thinkers say they are better. So I want to see how the two differ, and which one is a better system. And I want to show how the hypothesis can be useful
-
I meditated today and reached the conclusion that the cure for AIDS is large amounts of basil. Begin treatment immediately.
-
Let us know how your treatments progress. As an additional bonus, it might also be helpful to assess the beneficial effects, if any, of your meditations. If you were to compile data for oxygen consumption, EEG measurements, and heart rate before, during and after your meditations, it might prove most insightful. Keep good, clear records and maybe multiple copies just in case the basil doesn't cure you. Wishing you well and good luck!
-
Let us know how your treatments progress. As an additional bonus, it might also be helpful to assess the beneficial effects, if any, of your meditations. If you were to compile data for oxygen consumption, EEG measurements, and heart rate before, during and after your meditations, it might prove most insightful. Keep good, clear records and maybe multiple copies just in case the basil doesn't cure you. Wishing you well and good luck!
That would be testing a hypothesis, which is against zetetic principles. It was revealed to me in a mystical experience that basil is the cure for AIDS, therefore it must be true.
-
Let us know how your treatments progress. As an additional bonus, it might also be helpful to assess the beneficial effects, if any, of your meditations. If you were to compile data for oxygen consumption, EEG measurements, and heart rate before, during and after your meditations, it might prove most insightful. Keep good, clear records and maybe multiple copies just in case the basil doesn't cure you. Wishing you well and good luck!
That would be testing a hypothesis, which is against zetetic principles. It was revealed to me in a mystical experience that basil is the cure for AIDS, therefore it must be true.
You're missing the part of my post "if any." We would not be starting with some initial theory. We might be able to make a conclusion after the experimentation and observation data. It would not be interest in the AIDS part of your theory but in the raw data of your mediation sessions. Please reread my post, the 'added bonus' part.
-
I don't have the equipment to make the measurements you suggest, could you provide some funding so I might purchase them?
-
Perhaps you have a friend who could count respiration and heart rate.
-
Perhaps you have a friend who could count respiration and heart rate.
None of my friends can count.
-
Perhaps you have a friend who could count respiration and heart rate.
None of my friends can count.
Then meet people OUTSIDE of this forum. :P
-
Perhaps you have a friend who could count respiration and heart rate.
None of my friends can count.
Then meet people OUTSIDE of this forum. :P
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZINGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
-
Perhaps you have a friend who could count respiration and heart rate.
None of my friends can count.
Then meet people OUTSIDE of this forum. :P
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZINGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I take what I can get. :P
-
In the best Zetetic meditation I have ever seen (after Rowbotham's or Tom Bishop's "Earth seems flat"), it was clear that the Sun at dawn goes right ahead and crosses the horizon, without changing size, without changing speed, without twisting North.
Furthermore, I have firsthand knowledge that there are some six time zones between my home in South America and my siblings' homes in Europe. It is not just a man-made concoction, my siblings are at night and ready to go to sleep when I am in mid-afternoon.
Therefore, in the undeniable tradition of Zeteticism, I conclude that Earth is flat, that the Sun does not hover over Earth but really crosses the horizon and continues traveling down at dusk, and that my horizon is not Europe's horizon. And it is the Zetetic truth that the hovering Sun is hogwash.
-
ok pretend you are a Zet doctor.
Answer either of the three cases, they are
CASE I
your patient has a frequent history of nose bleeds, and develops internal bleeding, what do you treat for if you cannot form the hypothesis that is caused by HHT, the obvious choice.
In which part of their interior are they bleeding?
CASE II
your female patients has three children that are not genetically related to her at all, yet you have overwhelming evidence that she they were all born naturally. She has had intercourse and carried the children to term on three separate occasions, all of which are verified by family, OBGYNS, the general practitioner, etc.
What is this nature of this overwhelming evidence?
-
ok pretend you are a Zet doctor.
Answer either of the three cases, they are
CASE I
your patient has a frequent history of nose bleeds, and develops internal bleeding, what do you treat for if you cannot form the hypothesis that is caused by HHT, the obvious choice.
In which part of their interior are they bleeding?
CASE II
your female patients has three children that are not genetically related to her at all, yet you have overwhelming evidence that she they were all born naturally. She has had intercourse and carried the children to term on three separate occasions, all of which are verified by family, OBGYNS, the general practitioner, etc.
What is this nature of this overwhelming evidence?
CASE I, at the capillaries of the upper abdomen
CASE II, what do you mean by the nature. they have birth certificates, hospital and medical records, hospital staff witnesses, third party witnesses at the mother and fathers job. There financial and medical records show no indication that the pregnancies occurred do to in vitro fertilization or any other unnatural form of conception. In other words it is the closest you can get to proof that the couple had intercourse, conceived, and the mother had the baby. and yet DNA samples from the mother indicate a 0% match.
-
Oh reason...
The people who follow Zeteticsim don't come here. Those who do and say they follow zeteticsim are trolls or DAs.
How dare you undermine Zeteticsim with such outrageous claims, clearly you are not well versed in the logic of empirical reasoning. Open your eyes slave. You can only trust your own reasoning, based on your own sense's, I'm sure brother James will meditate hard and come up with not one, not two, not even three, but several successful hypothetical cures. I would; but I'm not as competent in the art of Zeteticsim, yet...
-
Oh reason...
The people who follow Zeteticsim don't come here. Those who do and say they follow zeteticsim are trolls or DAs.
How dare you undermine Zeteticsim with such outrageous claims, clearly you are not well versed in the logic of empirical reasoning. Open your eyes slave. You can only trust your own reasoning, based on your own sense's, I'm sure brother James will meditate hard and come up with not one, not two, not even three, but several successful hypothetical cures. I would; but I'm not as competent in the art of Zeteticsim, yet...
So far he is yet to answer. But he is not allowed to come up with a hypothesis like in science.
he wouldn't assume that CASE I has ____ based on a hunch.
He won't be able to solve CASE II because all of the currently observable data is contradictory.
He won't be able to solve CASE III (which only needs the type of disease i.e. bacteria, parisite, protist, fungi, genetic, enviromental)
because he is not allowed to perform an assay for a specific one based on uncertain factors.
I'm here to answer any more symptoms they might have
-
Oh reason...
The people who follow Zeteticsim don't come here. Those who do and say they follow zeteticsim are trolls or DAs.
How dare you undermine Zeteticsim with such outrageous claims, clearly you are not well versed in the logic of empirical reasoning. Open your eyes slave. You can only trust your own reasoning, based on your own sense's, I'm sure brother James will meditate hard and come up with not one, not two, not even three, but several successful hypothetical cures. I would; but I'm not as competent in the art of Zeteticsim, yet...
Your trolling is really bad dude. What makes it bad is the transparency. "Brother James"? Pfft. You've been here less than a day and you're idolizing James. If that's not a transparent attempt to get on his good side, making you look like a devoted FEer, I don't know what is.
-
Oh reason...
The people who follow Zeteticsim don't come here. Those who do and say they follow zeteticsim are trolls or DAs.
How dare you undermine Zeteticsim with such outrageous claims, clearly you are not well versed in the logic of empirical reasoning. Open your eyes slave. You can only trust your own reasoning, based on your own sense's, I'm sure brother James will meditate hard and come up with not one, not two, not even three, but several successful hypothetical cures. I would; but I'm not as competent in the art of Zeteticsim, yet...
Your trolling is really bad dude. What makes it bad is the transparency. "Brother James"? Pfft. You've been here less than a day and you're idolizing James. If that's not a transparent attempt to get on his good side, making you look like a devoted FEer, I don't know what is.
Renkano has already stated that he's lurked on this site for a very long time. That he would feel a fellowship with those who opened his eyes to the truth is not unexpected; and obviously he's well-acquainted with all of us, even if we aren't with him.
-
Oh reason...
The people who follow Zeteticsim don't come here. Those who do and say they follow zeteticsim are trolls or DAs.
How dare you undermine Zeteticsim with such outrageous claims, clearly you are not well versed in the logic of empirical reasoning. Open your eyes slave. You can only trust your own reasoning, based on your own sense's, I'm sure brother James will meditate hard and come up with not one, not two, not even three, but several successful hypothetical cures. I would; but I'm not as competent in the art of Zeteticsim, yet...
Your trolling is really bad dude. What makes it bad is the transparency. "Brother James"? Pfft. You've been here less than a day and you're idolizing James. If that's not a transparent attempt to get on his good side, making you look like a devoted FEer, I don't know what is.
Renkano has already stated that he's lurked on this site for a very long time. That he would feel a fellowship with those who opened his eyes to the truth is not unexpected; and obviously he's well-acquainted with all of us, even if we aren't with him.
You just described a stalker.
-
Oh reason...
The people who follow Zeteticsim don't come here. Those who do and say they follow zeteticsim are trolls or DAs.
How dare you undermine Zeteticsim with such outrageous claims, clearly you are not well versed in the logic of empirical reasoning. Open your eyes slave. You can only trust your own reasoning, based on your own sense's, I'm sure brother James will meditate hard and come up with not one, not two, not even three, but several successful hypothetical cures. I would; but I'm not as competent in the art of Zeteticsim, yet...
Your trolling is really bad dude. What makes it bad is the transparency. "Brother James"? Pfft. You've been here less than a day and you're idolizing James. If that's not a transparent attempt to get on his good side, making you look like a devoted FEer, I don't know what is.
Renkano has already stated that he's lurked on this site for a very long time. That he would feel a fellowship with those who opened his eyes to the truth is not unexpected; and obviously he's well-acquainted with all of us, even if we aren't with him.
You just described a stalker.
If you say so.
-
Oh reason...
The people who follow Zeteticsim don't come here. Those who do and say they follow zeteticsim are trolls or DAs.
How dare you undermine Zeteticsim with such outrageous claims, clearly you are not well versed in the logic of empirical reasoning. Open your eyes slave. You can only trust your own reasoning, based on your own sense's, I'm sure brother James will meditate hard and come up with not one, not two, not even three, but several successful hypothetical cures. I would; but I'm not as competent in the art of Zeteticsim, yet...
Your trolling is really bad dude. What makes it bad is the transparency. "Brother James"? Pfft. You've been here less than a day and you're idolizing James. If that's not a transparent attempt to get on his good side, making you look like a devoted FEer, I don't know what is.
Renkano has already stated that he's lurked on this site for a very long time. That he would feel a fellowship with those who opened his eyes to the truth is not unexpected; and obviously he's well-acquainted with all of us, even if we aren't with him.
You just described a stalker.
If you say so.
He's watched the forum for a long time.
He knows us better than we know him. (ie. he's gathered information)
He feels a bond between people he hasn't spoken to before. (1 day isn't enough to form a bond)
He's made over 30 posts in one day. While this isn't something I'd normally say is bad (most of us do this) it does fit the obsessive behavior as this is his first day registered.
Unless this is an alt account.
-
Oh reason...
The people who follow Zeteticsim don't come here. Those who do and say they follow zeteticsim are trolls or DAs.
How dare you undermine Zeteticsim with such outrageous claims, clearly you are not well versed in the logic of empirical reasoning. Open your eyes slave. You can only trust your own reasoning, based on your own sense's, I'm sure brother James will meditate hard and come up with not one, not two, not even three, but several successful hypothetical cures. I would; but I'm not as competent in the art of Zeteticsim, yet...
Your trolling is really bad dude. What makes it bad is the transparency. "Brother James"? Pfft. You've been here less than a day and you're idolizing James. If that's not a transparent attempt to get on his good side, making you look like a devoted FEer, I don't know what is.
Renkano has already stated that he's lurked on this site for a very long time. That he would feel a fellowship with those who opened his eyes to the truth is not unexpected; and obviously he's well-acquainted with all of us, even if we aren't with him.
You just described a stalker.
If you say so.
He's watched the forum for a long time.
He knows us better than we know him. (ie. he's gathered information)
He feels a bond between people he hasn't spoken to before. (1 day isn't enough to form a bond)
He's made over 30 posts in one day. While this isn't something I'd normally say is bad (most of us do this) it does fit the obsessive behavior as this is his first day registered.
Unless this is an alt account.
It's just been a slow day. In re-guards to your stalker accusation; could you call reading a book stalking, because you know more about the author then they know about you, or how about societies resent obsession with Katie price; is reading about her in your newspaper of choice stalking or indeed watching big brother. However, i digress, i prefer to read the truth from real people with real opinions, I think you confuse respect with an obsession. I don't personally know James or his colleagues. I know what they believe in re guard to FET. Your logic is flawed, and strange.
-
It's just been a slow day. In re-guards to your stalker accusation; could you call reading a book stalking, because you know more about the author then they know about you, or how about societies resent obsession with Katie price; is reading about her in your newspaper of choice stalking or indeed watching big brother. However, i digress, i prefer to read the truth from real people with real opinions, I think you confuse respect with an obsession. I don't personally know James or his colleagues. I know what they believe in re guard to FET. Your logic is flawed, and strange.
1. No. But one must make allowances for the internet. I can read about someone via their myspace page and other forums. That's stalking internet style.
2. I don't know who katie price is but any time anyone's life is forcefully put onto public display, I consider those who gossip and obsess over it pathetic.
However, i digress, i prefer to read the truth from real people with real opinions, I think you confuse respect with an obsession.
Boy did YOU come to the wrong place.
I don't personally know James or his colleagues.
Then why did you call him "Brother"? This is neither a cult nor a religious institution. And unless your culture considers the term brother to be a term of respect with someone you don't know, it's a very odd way to describe someone.
I know what they believe in re guard to FET. Your logic is flawed, and strange.
So do I.
Multiple variations of it. If you think my logic is flawed and strange it's no wonder you find FET to be logical and truthful. It is based on the opposite of my logic.
-
Can we get back on topic pl0x
-
It's just been a slow day. In re-guards to your stalker accusation; could you call reading a book stalking, because you know more about the author then they know about you, or how about societies resent obsession with Katie price; is reading about her in your newspaper of choice stalking or indeed watching big brother. However, i digress, i prefer to read the truth from real people with real opinions, I think you confuse respect with an obsession. I don't personally know James or his colleagues. I know what they believe in re guard to FET. Your logic is flawed, and strange.
1. No. But one must make allowances for the internet. I can read about someone via their myspace page and other forums. That's stalking internet style.
2. I don't know who katie price is but any time anyone's life is forcefully put onto public display, I consider those who gossip and obsess over it pathetic.
However, i digress, i prefer to read the truth from real people with real opinions, I think you confuse respect with an obsession.
Boy did YOU come to the wrong place.
I don't personally know James or his colleagues.
Then why did you call him "Brother"? This is neither a cult nor a religious institution. And unless your culture considers the term brother to be a term of respect with someone you don't know, it's a very odd way to describe someone.
I know what they believe in re guard to FET. Your logic is flawed, and strange.
So do I.
Multiple variations of it. If you think my logic is flawed and strange it's no wonder you find FET to be logical and truthful. It is based on the opposite of my logic.
I was merely offering respect to James. However I do agree with your comment about peoples lives being forced into public display, the celebrity culture is shallow and its ruining a lot of lives; see anorexic model wanna be's because they obsess over the 'perfect' looks thrust into there face's by the media every five seconds. That's why I prefer to read real facts like those posted in the FAQ for example.
I'd also like to point out reading the works of James and alike is much more comparable to a book, we're talking about a public forum, of which scientific idea's are discussed and advanced, its very very different to reading about someone's life, rather than their body of work. Another point; I bet you have read a few biography's in your time, I could call you a stalker, employing your kind of logic. Your comparison to a forum and social networking site is a poor argument. I rarely use facebook and when I do its to arrange real life meeting's with people I know in real life, why would I waste my time reading about someone i don't know via there facebook; all the people on mine I know, and anyone stupid enouth not to make their profile privite on a social networking site is stupid, therefore i would't want to know them.
-
It's just been a slow day. In re-guards to your stalker accusation; could you call reading a book stalking, because you know more about the author then they know about you, or how about societies resent obsession with Katie price; is reading about her in your newspaper of choice stalking or indeed watching big brother. However, i digress, i prefer to read the truth from real people with real opinions, I think you confuse respect with an obsession. I don't personally know James or his colleagues. I know what they believe in re guard to FET. Your logic is flawed, and strange.
1. No. But one must make allowances for the internet. I can read about someone via their myspace page and other forums. That's stalking internet style.
2. I don't know who katie price is but any time anyone's life is forcefully put onto public display, I consider those who gossip and obsess over it pathetic.
However, i digress, i prefer to read the truth from real people with real opinions, I think you confuse respect with an obsession.
Boy did YOU come to the wrong place.
I don't personally know James or his colleagues.
Then why did you call him "Brother"? This is neither a cult nor a religious institution. And unless your culture considers the term brother to be a term of respect with someone you don't know, it's a very odd way to describe someone.
I know what they believe in re guard to FET. Your logic is flawed, and strange.
So do I.
Multiple variations of it. If you think my logic is flawed and strange it's no wonder you find FET to be logical and truthful. It is based on the opposite of my logic.
I was merely offering respect to James. However I do agree with your comment about peoples lives being forced into public display, the celebrity culture is shallow and its ruining a lot of lives; see anorexic model wanna be's because they obsess over the 'perfect' looks thrust into there face's by the media every five seconds. That's why I prefer to read real facts like those posted in the FAQ for example.
I'd also like to point out reading the works of James and alike is much more comparable to a book, we're talking about a public forum, of which scientific idea's are discussed and advanced, its very very different to reading about someone's life, rather than their body of work. Another point; I bet you have read a few biography's in your time, I could call you a stalker, employing your kind of logic. Your comparison to a forum and social networking site is a poor argument. I rarely use facebook and when I do its to arrange real life meeting's with people I know in real life, why would I waste my time reading about someone i don't know via there facebook; all the people on mine I know, and anyone stupid enouth not to make their profile privite on a social networking site is stupid, therefore i would't want to know them.
I just want to make a note:
I never called you a stalker, just implied that your behavior reminds me of one. :P
-
Medicine is actually a Zetetic Science where the researcher puts the experiment first, conclusions after.
Hypothesis/Conclusion does not come first as the Scientific Method instructs. In Zeteticism the experiment must come before the conclusion.
When they want to know how different chemicals will react to red blood cells, for example, they create rooms and rooms of vials which test each and every result for the desired cause.
They do the same with the "Folding at Home" project. It tests each and every possibility methodically to find a suitable result.
There aren't any hypothesis' when it comes to medicine. When you want results you start with the experiment stage first, conclusions after. That's how you find the truth. Samuel Birley Rowbotham knew this very well.
Modern Medicine is a Zetetic Science. Doctor Samuel Birley Rowbotham even contributed to its establishment his very own self.
-
Medicine is actually a Zetetic Science where the researcher puts the experiment first, conclusions after.
So they just give people random drugs? O that's right, they don't. They already have a drug they think will do something. Then they test it.
Hypothesis/Conclusion does not come first as the Scientific Method instructs. In Zeteticism the experiment must come before the conclusion.
Scientific method does not say the conclution comes first.
When they want to know how different chemicals will react to red blood cells, for example, they create rooms and rooms of vials which test each and every result for the desired cause.
Yes the scientific method would allow that.
They do the same with the "Folding at Home" project. It tests each and every possibility methodically to find a suitable result.
You don't know what fah does.
There aren't any hypothesis' when it comes to medicine. When you want results you start with the experiment stage first, conclusions after. That's how you find the truth. Samuel Birley Rowbotham knew this very well.
False. Like I stated, one would just be throwing compounds at people until they saw something. This is not what pharmaceutical companies do.
Modern Medicine is a Zetetic Science. Doctor Samuel Birley Rowbotham even contributed to its establishment his very own self.
Not even close to true.
-
So they just give people random drugs?
They certainly test random drugs on biological samples, or small creatures, to see what works and what does not.
Scientific method does not say the conclution comes first.
The Scientific Method says that one must hypothesize first and then create an experiment around that hypothesis.
The Zetetic Method says that one must experiment first, letting the results speak for themselves.
Medical chemists certainly use the Zetetic Method for creating drugs. See the Folding at Home project. The project goes through a rapid series of different configurations to see what works and what does not.
Experiment first, conclude after. That's how the truth is found.
When you hypothesize first and create an experiment around that hypothesis your experiment is fallacious because you are deliberately proving whatever you are trying to prove. Finding the absolute truth of the matter has nothing to do with the Scientific Method. With the Scientific Method you are attempting to prove your idea true.
-
Medicine is actually a Zetetic Science where the researcher puts the experiment first, conclusions after.
Hypothesis/Conclusion does not come first as the Scientific Method instructs. In Zeteticism the experiment must come before the conclusion.
When they want to know how different chemicals will react to red blood cells, for example, they create rooms and rooms of vials which test each and every result for the desired cause.
They do the same with the "Folding at Home" project. It tests each and every possibility methodically to find a suitable result.
There aren't any hypothesis' when it comes to medicine. When you want results you start with the experiment stage first, conclusions after. That's how you find the truth. Samuel Birley Rowbotham knew this very well.
Modern Medicine is a Zetetic Science. Doctor Samuel Birley Rowbotham even contributed to its establishment his very own self.
In the old days(14th century), yes. They had an illness and tested random stuff to see what happens. Although even they had hypothesises. If chewing root X cured you, then root X cures you of the disease you have. That's a hypothesis.
-
They certainly test random drugs on biological samples, or small creatures, to see what works and what does not.
They would still have a hypothesis if they did it like that.
The Scientific Method says that one must hypothesize first and then create an experiment around that hypothesis.
The Zetetic Method says that one must experiment first, letting the results speak for themselves.
If you just experiment you will never be able to find what you are looking for. You will also not be able to remove all the variables.
Medical chemists certainly use the Zetetic Method for creating drugs. See the Folding at Home project. The project goes through a rapid series of different configurations to see what works and what does not.
Folding @ home (fah) folds proteins. They check for the lowest energy. The run certain proteins. This is in no way Zetetic Method.
Here is what they do.
Experiment first, conclude after. That's how the truth is found.
How do you set up an experiment when you don't even know what you are looking for?
When you hypothesize first and create an experiment around that hypothesis your experiment is fallacious because you are deliberately proving whatever you are trying to prove. Finding the absolute truth of the matter has nothing to do with the Scientific Method. With the Scientific Method you are attempting to prove your idea true.
You are trying to show your hypothesis. It either fails or it doesn't fail. You actually know what you are looking for so you can remove all the variables except the ones you want to test.
-
Medicine is actually a Zetetic Science where the researcher puts the experiment first, conclusions after.
Hypothesis/Conclusion does not come first as the Scientific Method instructs. In Zeteticism the experiment must come before the conclusion.
When they want to know how different chemicals will react to red blood cells, for example, they create rooms and rooms of vials which test each and every result for the desired cause.
They do the same with the "Folding at Home" project. It tests each and every possibility methodically to find a suitable result.
There aren't any hypothesis' when it comes to medicine. When you want results you start with the experiment stage first, conclusions after. That's how you find the truth. Samuel Birley Rowbotham knew this very well.
Modern Medicine is a Zetetic Science. Doctor Samuel Birley Rowbotham even contributed to its establishment his very own self.
Incorrect.
Doctors use hypoitheses all the time.
how else would you know what to test for, if you could only test for one.
Granted you can use the brute force method, but doctors can't always test for everything.
The first thing actually is observation, aka patient history and where does it hurt.
then comes expirement if necessary.
with your method, how will you solve the cases?
You seem to not understnad the difference between hypothesis and conclusion.
The beginning of the SM, is observation and hypothesis, much like Zeteicism. then they test even more to see if they are right, which is unlike Zeteticism, where you assume your initial logic to be correct.