Offline spank86

  • *
  • Posts: 252
    • View Profile
Re: Is it possible to prove a negative?
« Reply #180 on: January 03, 2014, 07:56:40 AM »
Who originally claimed cancer?  Early stages of cancer often have no symptoms.  In fact, it would be preferable to find any cancer before any symptoms become evident.  This is why routine screening (including blood work) is so important.

I don't know who originally, It's a long way back.

And we've already established it's not a routine appointment, that's an entirely different matter and would have no bearing on the situation.

*

Offline markjo

  • *
  • Posts: 7849
  • Zetetic Council runner-up
    • View Profile
Re: Is it possible to prove a negative?
« Reply #181 on: January 03, 2014, 01:23:36 PM »
Who originally claimed cancer?  Early stages of cancer often have no symptoms.  In fact, it would be preferable to find any cancer before any symptoms become evident.  This is why routine screening (including blood work) is so important.

I don't know who originally, It's a long way back.

And we've already established it's not a routine appointment, that's an entirely different matter and would have no bearing on the situation.
So, why would a doctor not order routine tests for a non-routine appointment?  Don't forget that the medicine is a business.  Unless you come in overly frequently for screening and keep getting a clean bill of health, why would the doctor turn down easy money?
Abandon hope all ye who press enter here.

Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.

Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge. -- Charles Darwin

If you can't demonstrate it, then you shouldn't believe it.

Offline spank86

  • *
  • Posts: 252
    • View Profile
Re: Is it possible to prove a negative?
« Reply #182 on: January 03, 2014, 02:32:06 PM »
Who originally claimed cancer?  Early stages of cancer often have no symptoms.  In fact, it would be preferable to find any cancer before any symptoms become evident.  This is why routine screening (including blood work) is so important.

I don't know who originally, It's a long way back.

And we've already established it's not a routine appointment, that's an entirely different matter and would have no bearing on the situation.
So, why would a doctor not order routine tests for a non-routine appointment?  Don't forget that the medicine is a business.  Unless you come in overly frequently for screening and keep getting a clean bill of health, why would the doctor turn down easy money?

Over here it's not easy money.

It's not any money. That's the beauty of the NHS, I don't get mugged for cash once a year so the doctor can tell me I'm still 5ft 7inches tall and 10stone.

*

Offline Pete Svarrior

  • e
  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 16073
  • (◕˽ ◕ ✿)
    • View Profile
Re: Is it possible to prove a negative?
« Reply #183 on: January 03, 2014, 03:38:20 PM »
Over here it's not easy money.

It's not any money. That's the beauty of the NHS, I don't get mugged for cash once a year so the doctor can tell me I'm still 5ft 7inches tall and 10stone.
Are you suggesting that British doctors don't get paid? They still get money, they just don't get it (directly) from you. It goes from you to the government to the NHS to the doctor.
Read the FAQ before asking your question - chances are we already addressed it.
Follow the Flat Earth Society on Twitter and Facebook!

If we are not speculating then we must assume

Offline spank86

  • *
  • Posts: 252
    • View Profile
Re: Is it possible to prove a negative?
« Reply #184 on: January 03, 2014, 03:53:18 PM »
Over here it's not easy money.

It's not any money. That's the beauty of the NHS, I don't get mugged for cash once a year so the doctor can tell me I'm still 5ft 7inches tall and 10stone.
Are you suggesting that British doctors don't get paid? They still get money, they just don't get it (directly) from you. It goes from you to the government to the NHS to the doctor.

of course not. they get a very nice salary.

That's not dependent on whether they tell me how tall I am or not, nor does it change dependent on if they send me for blood tests.

Re: Is it possible to prove a negative?
« Reply #185 on: January 03, 2014, 11:20:50 PM »
tom: would you briefly explain what, in your opinion, is the difference between a 'negative' and 'positive' claim? what does that distinction mean to you?
I have visited from prestigious research institutions of the highest caliber, to which only our administrator holds with confidence.

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 10637
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: Is it possible to prove a negative?
« Reply #186 on: January 04, 2014, 03:39:39 AM »
tom: would you briefly explain what, in your opinion, is the difference between a 'negative' and 'positive' claim? what does that distinction mean to you?

Negative claims are an absence, not a reworded positive claim. It is not "0". It is "-".

Negative claims hold a special distinction. If I claim that the window is NOT open, it does not mean I am claiming that the window is closed. I am claiming that the window is NOT open.

It is possible that the window does not even exist, making the claims that the window is both 'not open' and 'not closed' simultaneously true.

It is also possible that the window is positively open or closed, but due lack of evidence of its positive state, and lack of evidence of its existence altogether, we are compelled to define it as it is, a NOT. Barring some sort of evidence otherwise, the window does not exist and it is neither open or closed. It is the burden of the person with the positive claim -- that the window exists, or that the window is open or closed -- to provide evidence for that claim.

We must believe in nothing because there is no evidence. Once there is evidence we can start believing in things.
« Last Edit: January 04, 2014, 04:10:52 AM by Tom Bishop »

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 10637
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: Is it possible to prove a negative?
« Reply #187 on: January 04, 2014, 03:58:06 AM »
You refute the evidence by claiming that the satellite did not take into account all the variables it needed to, it is YOUR claim.  You need to back up your claim that the evidence is not adequate.  You cannot simply say "Nope, that doesn't prove anything" and walk away.  You need to back it up.

There was no claim that it was a controlled trial. As it is described from the sources presented on this forum, there were no mention of controls. This is evidence that there were none.

Quote
Also, where is your evidence backing up your positive claim that only positive claims need to be backed up?  I have shown you that ALL claims need to be backed up.

So the person who disagrees with a lunatic claiming that ghosts exist needs to prove, beyond an absence of evidence, that ghosts do not exist?

No way. The person claiming that ghosts exist needs to PROVE THEY EXIST. The conversation stops there once he is unable to provide the evidence for his claim.
« Last Edit: January 04, 2014, 04:01:35 AM by Tom Bishop »

Offline bj1234

  • *
  • Posts: 112
    • View Profile
Re: Is it possible to prove a negative?
« Reply #188 on: January 04, 2014, 04:00:49 AM »
Nice double speak there Tom.  You should try to be a polotician.

If you cannot know for certain the state of the window you cannot make the truth claim that the window is not open.  That is a claim that requires support of some sort.

If you do not know, what is the hang up about admitting that you do not have enough evidence to make a claim.

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 10637
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: Is it possible to prove a negative?
« Reply #189 on: January 04, 2014, 04:06:02 AM »
Nice double speak there Tom.  You should try to be a polotician.

If you cannot know for certain the state of the window you cannot make the truth claim that the window is not open.  That is a claim that requires support of some sort.

If you do not know, what is the hang up about admitting that you do not have enough evidence to make a claim.

There is support for the claim 'the window is not open'. The support for the claim that the window is not open is the absence of evidence that it is open. The statement that 'the window is not closed' is equally valid for the same reason.

All truths are determined with available evidence. "I don't know" is an excuse to not answer what the available evidence shows. The available evidence concludes that the window is NOT open. If there is no evidence, it is a not.
« Last Edit: January 04, 2014, 04:08:36 AM by Tom Bishop »

Rama Set

Re: Is it possible to prove a negative?
« Reply #190 on: January 04, 2014, 04:08:26 AM »
You refute the evidence by claiming that the satellite did not take into account all the variables it needed to, it is YOUR claim.  You need to back up your claim that the evidence is not adequate.  You cannot simply say "Nope, that doesn't prove anything" and walk away.  You need to back it up.

There was no claim that it was a controlled trial. As it is described from the sources presented on this forum, there were no mention of controls. This is evidence that there were none.

Quote
Also, where is your evidence backing up your positive claim that only positive claims need to be backed up?  I have shown you that ALL claims need to be backed up.

So the person who disagrees with a lunatic claiming that ghosts exist needs to prove, beyond an absence of evidence, that ghosts do not exist?

No way. The person claiming that ghosts exist needs to PROVE THEY EXIST. The conversation stops there once he is unable to provide the evidence for his claim.

There were predictions made regarding magnitude of error sources and results were plotted against the actual sources of error. How does this not qualify as a control?

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 10637
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: Is it possible to prove a negative?
« Reply #191 on: January 04, 2014, 04:09:46 AM »
There were predictions made regarding magnitude of error sources and results were plotted against the actual sources of error. How does this not qualify as a control?

The variables involved were not controlled. Please look up how a controlled experiment is performed.

Rama Set

Re: Is it possible to prove a negative?
« Reply #192 on: January 04, 2014, 04:10:50 AM »
Nice double speak there Tom.  You should try to be a polotician.

If you cannot know for certain the state of the window you cannot make the truth claim that the window is not open.  That is a claim that requires support of some sort.

If you do not know, what is the hang up about admitting that you do not have enough evidence to make a claim.

There is support for the claim 'the window is not open'. The support for the claim that the window is not open is the absence of evidence that it is open. The statement that 'the window is not closed' is equally valid for the same reason.

All truths are determined with available evidence. "I don't know" has nothing to do with what the available evidence shows. The available evidence concludes that the window is NOT open. If there is no evidence, it is a not.

If you are not looking at a window you have no evidence of it. The only honest claim you can make is "I do not know." Anything else is semantic play.

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 10637
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: Is it possible to prove a negative?
« Reply #193 on: January 04, 2014, 04:13:55 AM »
If you are not looking at a window you have no evidence of it. The only honest claim you can make is "I do not know." Anything else is semantic play.

If there is no available evidence of the window, that is evidence that it does not exist. All truths are made from available evidence.

"I don't know" is not a claim at all. It is an avoidance of claim. It is a refusal to participate, and has no place in the weighing evidence and honest debate.
« Last Edit: January 04, 2014, 04:16:28 AM by Tom Bishop »

Rama Set

Re: Is it possible to prove a negative?
« Reply #194 on: January 04, 2014, 04:15:57 AM »
There were predictions made regarding magnitude of error sources and results were plotted against the actual sources of error. How does this not qualify as a control?

The variables involved were not controlled. Please look up how a controlled experiment is performed.

There are various types of valid experimental methods of which controlled experiment is but one.

Please read about natural experiments and how they deal with variables and their control.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_experiment

Offline bj1234

  • *
  • Posts: 112
    • View Profile
Re: Is it possible to prove a negative?
« Reply #195 on: January 04, 2014, 04:16:54 AM »
Nice double speak there Tom.  You should try to be a polotician.

If you cannot know for certain the state of the window you cannot make the truth claim that the window is not open.  That is a claim that requires support of some sort.

If you do not know, what is the hang up about admitting that you do not have enough evidence to make a claim.

There is support for the claim 'the window is not open'. The support for the claim that the window is not open is the absence of evidence that it is open. The statement that 'the window is not closed' is equally valid for the same reason.

All truths are determined with available evidence. "I don't know" is an excuse to not answer what the available evidence shows. The available evidence concludes that the window is NOT open. If there is no evidence, it is a not.

No, saying I don't know keeps me from making a fool of myself when there is insufficient data to come to a logical conclusion.

Offline bj1234

  • *
  • Posts: 112
    • View Profile
Re: Is it possible to prove a negative?
« Reply #196 on: January 04, 2014, 04:21:18 AM »
If you are not looking at a window you have no evidence of it. The only honest claim you can make is "I do not know." Anything else is semantic play.

If there is no available evidence of the window, that is evidence that it does not exist. All truths are made from available evidence.

"I don't know" is not a claim at all. It is an avoidance of claim. It is a refusal to participate, and has no place in the weighing evidence and honest debate.

We finally agree on something.  Saying I don't know is not a claim.  However, it is not a refusal to participate.  It is acknowledging that my knowledge on the subject at hand is limitied.  It allows me to gather more evidencefrom an unbiased point of view.

Rama Set

Re: Is it possible to prove a negative?
« Reply #197 on: January 04, 2014, 04:22:15 AM »
If you are not looking at a window you have no evidence of it. The only honest claim you can make is "I do not know." Anything else is semantic play.

If there is no available evidence of the window, that is evidence that it does not exist. All truths are made from available evidence.

"I don't know" is not a claim at all. It is an avoidance of claim, and has no place in weighing evidence in debate.

If you cannot see a window and you have no way of knowing if a window exists or not, "I don't know" is a claim that based on the available evidence it is impossible to tell if a window is open or not.  This is different than if you are looking at a brick wall and asked about the state of the window on the wall that is not there.  I sincerely hope you can tell the difference.

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 10637
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: Is it possible to prove a negative?
« Reply #198 on: January 04, 2014, 04:23:10 AM »
Bj, Rama, I have never seen evidence for ghosts, and the source claiming that they exist is unable to provide evidence of existence. This is evidence that they do not exist.

I am not burdened to prove that ghosts do not exist.

Please tell me that I need to prove that ghosts do not exist if I disagree with someone who claims that ghosts exist, so we can all see how stupid you sound.
« Last Edit: January 04, 2014, 04:48:40 AM by Tom Bishop »

Offline bj1234

  • *
  • Posts: 112
    • View Profile
Re: Is it possible to prove a negative?
« Reply #199 on: January 04, 2014, 04:27:59 AM »
No, saying I don't know keeps me from making a fool of myself when there is insufficient data to come to a logical conclusion.

Sure there is. I have never seen evidence for ghosts, and the source claiming that they exist is unable to provide evidence of existence, so this is evidence that they do not exist.

I am not burdened to prove that ghosts do not exist.

Please tell me that I need to prove that ghosts do not exist if I disagree with someone who claims that ghosts exist, so we can all see how stupid you sound.
Then state it as abelief. I don't believe ghosts exist is much different that saying ghosts don't exist.

If someone shows you a picture of a ghost, that is their evidence.  You cannot then claim ghosts don't exist until you demonstrate that the picture is not genuine.  So please tell me you still don't understand the difference between a truth claim and a statement of belief.