a reliable indicator that information (findings) may still be a hypothesis and not universally accepted as an inarguable fact, is when opposite beliefs still exist.
I know people that will argue until they are blue in the face that we never actually went to the moon. I doubt seriously that you can come up with information or findings that are universally agreed with. I would certainly be interseted to such a finding that no one dissented.
" There is no particular reason to believe that the conclusion about what should be done, when reached by a scientist (physicist, engineer, journeyman, etc,) is any better or any more logical than the conclusion reached by a politician, or by the general public. If a scientist takes pride in the belief that only empirical methods produce knowledge and everything else is erroneous or irrelevant, then the resulting ignorance of other thought processes, disciplines and people is more likely to produce a bad decision than a good one. Knowledge, thinking, decisions, and their consequences are interrelated. Science provides one of many methods of thinking and of obtaining knowledge; it is most effective when integrated with others as well. That is; it is impractical to think only one way."
That sounds like it was written by a politician. I think most " pracitcal" people with an average amount of common sense would tell you " there is no substitue for experience" . That is why we have scientists and engineers running the space program, not politicians or the general public.
