If Charles Manson said that the sun rises from the East...wouldn't it be true, regardless of the source? What Oracle said can easily be checked by a lot of independent companies.
Asking for scientific evidence that the sun will come up is almost like trolling.
In an adversarial system your chances depend on the amount of valid legal process-effort you exert. If you acknowledge that this effort is correlated with financing, even a little, then you admit there is a vulnerability.
A more reasonable question would be if they have a reason to assume that the variable has an oversized impact on the process.
There are many statements we would agree to be neither true nor false; here are a couple:
1. The sun will rise tomorrow. 2. This statement is false.
Note that this is not the kind of information which is controversial in our society and germane to decision making. (Other than that we will assume the sun will rise tomorrow as a given, but we can't stop with that.)
Science: Sun rises in the east
A: Sun rises in the west
B: Here is some evidence that sun rises in the east (recommendation) (or) You're insane for not believing in that (pressure?)
Is B trying to use components of frame control to take over A's reality?
Ultimately you are right, but this is basically Popper vs Kuhn. I can confidently say that the sun will indeed rise tomorrow from the East and set on the West, to pretend otherwise is sheer folly.
You want evidence that the most advertised product is not necessarily the "best" one? OK, but right after I prove that the sun rises, more or less, from the East.
> the scientific approach is different -- it's all about finding patterns that do repeat and making predictions
Sure, but if you're scientifically looking to answer "where and when will the sun rise" you're only going to collect enough variables to answer that question, and within an acceptable margin of error, right? If you can measure with greater accuracy and collect more data, then you would probably realize that every sunrise is not strictly identical.
We're splitting hairs at this point but I wonder if the comment I replied to that stated that "it has never happened before and will never happen again" can't be argued to be actually true. In a philosophical sense it's more obvious, but in a scientific sense, the more precision you get in your analysis of a sunrise, the more data you would get that differentiates it from other sunrises, no? After all, our solar system isn't closed and constant and there are minor changes not only in smaller factors like weather on Earth, but also larger factors like the orbit of the earth and the drift of the different planetary bodies.
reply