For ****ing example. The question about the conditions that existed prior to the big bang. Are metaphysical. Thus can only be answered with untestable hypothesis. Because. My dears. The laws of physics breakdown at that point. We cannot apply the scientific method of investigation!
I can straighten that right out for you.
Metaphysical questions can only be answered with untestable hypothesis.
Scientific questions can be answered with testable hypothesis, supported by empirically derived evidence.
To produce the scientific theory.
X
It is objective. Obviously. Since the scientific method is an objective methodology of investigation.
You're so full of crap. It's baffling. The method is flawless, even if the data isnt. Unless of course you think it can be improved somehow? Maybe psi powers?
Name a method of investigation more productive and more objective than the scientific method. Otherwise...yes. Relatively speaking. There is no better way. To understand the nature of reality.
Well I was a HPLC accredited chemical analyst for 12 years. There's that experience that tells me wiki has got it about right. Please provide any additional information that contradicts wiki.
The scientific method is an empirical method of acquiring knowledge that has characterized the development of science since at least the 17th century (with notable practitioners in previous centuries). It involves careful observation, applying rigorous skepticism about what is observed, given...
Interpretation can be faulty. Instrumental error can result in false data. Some scientists even fabricate data.
This all gets rectified thanks to the scientific method. Which demands that all conclusions are falsifiable and indepently verifiable.