Is Science Binary?

[Eclogite]

In another thread dumbass made the comment:

 

What does "mostly based on science" mean? Science is binary, either something is based on science or not.

 

 

I disagree with this statement. I take a single example as a trivial demonstration. Many others are available.

 

Formula 1 racing is assuredly based on the science of aerodynamics (and other sciences), but the skill of individual drivers is an equally potent ingredient.

 

Any challenges to that, or will this be a very short duration thread?

[ErlyRisa]

Its the shampoo commercial is it not?

 

goes something like this: "With years of testing shampoo X has been proven too do Y 'based on science'"

 

The commercial wouldn't sound as good if went like this:

 

Shampoo X is based on years of many qualified peoples lives wasted on trying too keep the masses bimbos looking good, they would rather be trying to make carbon nano tubes or solving a pertinent environmental issue, but you know: Where would we be without Cacuts extract and the such, who needs monkeys in the forest when we need to grow palmoil for that silky smooth look (Yes palm oil is used elsewhere, and the topic arises other issues)

 

"Based on Science" : it's a cheap shot, you don't hear other sectors like maybe the CPU manufacturers stating thier product is based on science... of course it fricken is, you think we fashioned computers out of hippies egg washed hair?

[Dumbass]

Eclogite,

 

And that's why formula one racing is not scientific, something might have elements in it of science, but that means it is a zero scientifically, since even the smallest reasonable doubt in science would void the scientific field as pseudo science.

 

What am trying to say is that some things are semi scientific. But that is irrelevent since I think any wiggle space would make the 1 into 0.

[Turtle]

What do you expect from a dumbass?