Mark Knowles > 22-11-2024, 04:55 PM
Koen G > 22-11-2024, 04:58 PM
(22-11-2024, 04:23 PM)Mark Knowles Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.These methodical differences are interesting.
Mark Knowles > 22-11-2024, 08:27 PM
(22-11-2024, 04:58 PM)Koen G Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. If memory serves, Michelle and Keagan account for quite a number of details for the rosettes page, but they think it's a uterus. I'm sure that if they allowed themselves a bit more leeway and studied more gynecological texts, they could eventually link everything on the page to things that have been written in the Middle Ages about the female reproductive system. If eventually they take in more details than you do, does that make them the winner? There surely have to be other criteria.Do you have a link to their rosettes theory?
R. Sale > 22-11-2024, 08:31 PM
Mark Knowles > 23-11-2024, 04:09 PM
(22-11-2024, 04:58 PM)Koen G Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.(22-11-2024, 04:23 PM)Mark Knowles Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.These methodical differences are interesting.They sure are.
(22-11-2024, 04:58 PM)Koen G Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.What I'm saying is that accounting for all the details doesn't necessarily make a theory any better.
Mark Knowles > 23-11-2024, 04:15 PM
(22-11-2024, 04:58 PM)Koen G Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.(22-11-2024, 04:23 PM)Mark Knowles Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.These methodical differences are interesting.
They sure are. What I'm saying is that accounting for all the details doesn't necessarily make a theory any better.
Mark Knowles > 23-11-2024, 04:26 PM
(22-11-2024, 04:58 PM)Koen G Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Another issue is that the more details one forces into one's theory, the more entrenched this theory becomes.
Mark Knowles > 23-11-2024, 04:31 PM
Koen G > 23-11-2024, 04:34 PM
Mark Knowles > 23-11-2024, 09:41 PM
(23-11-2024, 04:34 PM)Koen G Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.What I'm saying is that the amount of detail, whether it be great or small, it not necessarily the best metric to judge a theory by.I certainly wouldn't view it as the only metric to judge a theory by. Clearly, the extent to which an explanation of a detail fits consistently and logically with the explanation and identification of the other details identified is important. Merely counting the number of details that a person says that their theory explains and then seeing which person arrives at the largest number is not a good measure. A random assignment of identifications would be in this instance as good or better than any other.