Space/Science — HabitableZone

Space/Science » in reply to it is always bad science to ignore contrary evidence and/or the balance of the data

re: it is always bad science to ignore contrary evidence and/or the balance of the data
JonClarke — (archived)

Sloppy, yes, undesirable, yes, bad, well, in that case most scientists I know are guilty of bad science.

I think Levin has posed some hard questions that the majority interpretation view has generally avoided. By your definition, guilty of bad science. For this reason the Atacama analogue is very interesting because it is a step to addressing some of those questions.

What aspects of Levin's liquid water mechanism do you find proposterous?

Cheers

Jon

Log in or register to post.

The whole thread (17 posts)