The Scientific Method

Regarding your article “Not Up for Debate” (March 21) about “the Environmental Science Academy at Churchill High School in Eugene,” I would like to point out a few things you forgot to mention. Quotes are from the article; comments are mine.

“Occasionally students ask if they are going to present material showing the other side. Ruggiero tells them, ‘This is a science class; I teach the science. If you can find something that’s science-based, I am happy to preview it. Please, prove me wrong, I would be thrilled!’”

Fact: The word “science” is more of a verb than a noun; the scientific method is what we should be talking about. All models have failed spectacularly; to reference her boycott of any opposing positions would precluded her to accept any ability to “thrill” her with alternative proof. What happened to the facts?

“Sarah Stapleton, assistant professor of education studies in the teacher education program at the University of Oregon, is an expert in science education. ‘I’m not trying to tell students what to believe or think, but my job is to help them understand the science and to look at the facts — to ask, ‘What does scientific consensus mean?’”

Fact: I would refer her to Albert Einstein who famously said, “Why 100 authors? If I were wrong, then one would have been enough!”

Consensus is utterly irrelevant to science. The philosophy of science is devoid of consensus. Next time you bathe in the beauty of a field of wildflowers, thank CO2.

Mark Fiser