Bad science: Forked Thread: Heroes: (Volume Three: Villains) The Second Coming
Brown Jenkin
First Post
Doctor Who hasn't really tried to deal with hard science. Rarely does it try to even explain its super-science.
X-Files did try to occasionally dabble in trying to explain what is happening. But then much of the show was also summed up in the poster "I Want to Believe." Normally the real truth couldn't proven and Mulder remained the only real believer. Science didn't solve the problem, the problem normally died or escaped.
Star Trek definitely tried to base itself off of psuedo science. It tried hard to keep continuity with itself and as long as you were willing to believe the polarity of the tachyon field could be reversed then it normally worked out ok.
Lost originally claimed that it was based on reasonable pseudo science but has moved into the realm of magic and super science.
Sure is. It's broad enough to include works in which the accuracy of the science is irrelevant.
Like ones where people can, under their own power, thanks to some faux-evolutionary hoo-ha, do things like teleport, fly, phase, and flash-evolve by massaging some other poor saps exposed gray matter.
I can see your point, here. They COULD have used made-up words for their made-up science, but they didn't, and actual words mean actual things.
Brown Jenkin
First Post
Well, you seemed to initially be agreeing with the previous assertion that Heroes and 4400 weren't sci-fi.
Krug
Newshound
Well Heroes you just have to laugh at the bad science. I mean bring up The Butterfly Effect now? When Hiro had been tramping in feudal Japan all of last season?
But that adrenaline mumbo-jumbo Suresh was spouting made me cringe.
Of course it's not the worst offender. In Fringe episode 2,
Made me give up on the show.
But that adrenaline mumbo-jumbo Suresh was spouting made me cringe.
Of course it's not the worst offender. In Fringe episode 2,
the victim gives birth to a child that grows and ages, and even after the baby has popped up, he continues to grow. Where does all that mass come from?
DonTadow
First Post
--Better thread for this convo--
Hey I'm just the messanger. It's a theory because it can't be proven. Else it will fall into the fact realm (if it were measurable). Many species do not evolve but humans have evolved, so it is reasonable to believe that we have not quit evolving. Oddly enough this is something that the heroes show has touched on plenty of times, so its not odd that Mohinder believes in this theory.
As atheory though, this argument is frequently debated. We debated it in my theoligical philosophy class 8 years ago. I've learned that with theories, because they can't be proven you either believe or you don't beleve. I believe that humans can't possibly be done.
Mustrum_Ridcully
Hero
I am afraid it is a very bad theory. I have an other theory to offer, which is only slightly less useful as this 10 % of brain use.
- I think the Moon has a layer of cheese in itself. We can't see it from the outside, and it is probably to thin to have a notable effect on the geology. But it's a theory!
A theory should only ever be relevant if it makes predictions that we can test. (It is one of the big problems of the string theory - while it might predict something, we can't test it yet). What does the 10 % brain usage theory predict? What will happen? Can we measure it somehow? Is there an experiment we could try (if we had the right tools?).
Heck, maybe my cheese-moon theory is actually better, because I can think of a way to test it - We just need a drilling roboter that drills deep enough. Not something we'll pull off in the next few years or decades, but it's at least a feasible idea.
Err... one of the defining characteristics of a scientific theory is that it can be proven (possibly not with tools and techniques that currently exist, but it's not a valid theory if it's unproveable).
Similar Threads
