Why are predictions of the future always so negative?

Because inciting fear is a very effective tool for controlling the weak minded.

Actually, I think gravity is a law. But that's just being picky. But you're talking about scientific theories, which means that after many experiments it hasn't been unproven. The general use of the word just means a claim. You could be talking scientifically, though, I haven't been paying enough attention.

There's also a chance that anyone who drives a vehicle can die in a car crash.
But does that mean it's inevitable? No.

Possibilities are not proof.



Anyway, back to the original point of the thread:
If we're still in this forum by December 21st of 2012, we can do a poll on who thinks the world ended...

If Soulja Boy wins a grammy then I'm gonna vote yes.

LMBO!
:rofl:

Actually, gravitation as explained scientifically is also a theory, the theory of gravity. You're basically right in your terminology, a scientific theory describes a phenomena (like gravity or evolution) and is backed up empirically, typically by several scientific publications proving various hypotheses that fall under that theory.

Hypotheses are what scientists often work with, for example I have a hypothesis that a species of mite can be carried with wind. I can set up an experiment and test that hypothesis against an opposing hypothesis saying that species of mites can not be carried with wind. Evidence for one is automatically evidence against the other.

By setting up experiments and collecting statistical data, I can prove by a 95% confidence interval that yes, the mite can be transported by wind or - that it can't. Much of established science is backed up by such testing and the 95% confidence interval is usually the lowest level of significance accepted in the scientific community. In other words, the probability of your claim being true should at least be 95%.


Theories do change over time as they accumulate knowledge. For example we can learn something new about gravitation and that can become part of the theory. Some old parts of it might be proven wrong etc.

You have run trotsky, run as your usertitle.

EDIT: In respone to SJ's last message to me.

Are you honestly trying to compare to idolizing Stalin to idolizing Trotsky? I'll ignore the fact my user title is clearly wordplay and humor you since you obviously have no knowledge of Marxist theories or Russian history.

Trotskyism and Stalinism are complete opposites. Trotsky championed proletariat rule with true democratic principles. Stalinism is a system of complete state control, mass-murder, propaganda, spying and injustice. Just because both are vaguely associated with Communism (one more so than the other) doesn't mean they're interchangeable or even comparable.

I took it that "run, trotsky run" was a reference from Trotsky running from Stalin all the way down to Mexico City where he had him murdered with an ice pick.