One gathers from Mano Singham that teaching science ought also to include
teaching what science is not.

Physics is essentially an experimental science in which laws are arrived
at by generalizing results obtained by experiments. Astronomy is an
observational science, whereas cosmology and evolutionary theory are more
akin to forensic science. Because cosmology and evolutionary theory deal
with unique events and rely on deduction rather than induction, the search
for truth is not as convincing or conclusive as it is in physics.

It is clear that detectors, governed by the laws of nature, can obtain all
the data needed to do science. Such data are the sole input for scientific
theories. Of course, the human mind is the creator of mathematics and
develops the models to describe the systems determined by the physical
data.

If nonhuman detectors cannot detect a thing, then it does not constitute
scientific data nor is it the subject matter of science.

It is important to distinguish this type of data from the data gathered by
humans when they are considered as "instruments" or "detectors." The human
"detector" takes in more than the purely physical; in particular, it
"detects" intelligence or design in nature owing to the reasoning ability
of the human mind. Making all this clear would have helped Doug realize
that relativity is not a matter of belief but that what is required of a
theory is that its predictions are consistent with experimental data. Such
clarification might have led Jamal to realize that cosmology is not a
verbal scenario of the origin of what exists but rather a set of
mathematical formulas that govern the dynamics of the universe.

Teachers ought to encourage students to express their skepticism of
scientific concepts and theories. True learning occurs only when the
learner, whether student or teacher, finds answers to his or her own
doubts.

Moorad Alexanian
University of North Carolina at Wilmington

POWRÓT