the doomsday project

the doomsday project

Is science a democracy? in other words, the controversial theory validée how scientists do not vote for him?

I have (not cite.

'' An army of scientists who know what they say on them and half sleep as far as concerns the LHC, "Evans, project leader said.

It is two articles on Atomic supercollider.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080628/ap_on_re_eu/doomsday_collider

I am not discuss a way you another, but sometimes it is to be a whenever is a dissension in scientific circle, as this evil-doer, because so few scientists faith in him.

In a sense, Yes.Science is a democratic enterprises. If a large number of scientists says X with a small number of words not X, is more likely this is wide and there will be no reason.This is for this reason, as in any other field, an overwhelming majority of the experts had a leader, Avis more likely to correct than a group opinion held by a minority.It is more than a minority experts did erreurs than a majority.This of course is not always said most people right in the eyes of God, and obviously not true.

For nonexperts, we have to two experts on témoignage. most people reading this article, especially my could evaluate discuss bipartisan, and coming to a conclusion éduqués. If there is slightly obvious sins were burned on one side or the other, you have not good judges of: for this reason we are experts on was: If there is disagreement among experts (it is still not complete have) your kidney and whichever way, it is the majority of persons; The majority of admissions, less hard we can do.

'' A great army of scientists "who sees anything critical about 11 th LHC count as proof to this people lagliz LHC. Yes to experts in the field, the majority of evidence should not be using them very in the garden, they should have the right to discuss, weigh the evidence for themselves.

Sonic Nebulous.Doomsday project