One of Darwin's evolution theories finally proved by Cambridge researcher
1–10 of 88 posts
Re: One of Darwin's evolution theories finally proved by Cambridge researcher
#2Proved -> Proven?
Have we reached the point where basic vocabulary is too difficult for HN users now?
Re: One of Darwin's evolution theories finally proved by Cambridge researcher
#3Proved -> Proven? Have we reached the point where basic vocabulary is too difficult for HN users now?
Or phys.org editors? The HN guidelines suggest using the original title.
Re: One of Darwin's evolution theories finally proved by Cambridge researcher
#4Proved -> Proven? Have we reached the point where basic vocabulary is too difficult for HN users now?
It's HN policy not to editorialize the title. In this case, the linked article uses "proved".
Re: One of Darwin's evolution theories finally proved by Cambridge researcher
#5Scientific theories are not "proven", that is not how science works. All theories are always and forever open to falsification. The scientific attitude is one of eternal doubt. "Proof" is something that only exists in the realm of pure math.
Re: One of Darwin's evolution theories finally proved by Cambridge researcher
#6Proved -> Proven? Have we reached the point where basic vocabulary is too difficult for HN users now?
Both forms are correct, but proved is more prevalent in recent style guides.
As one who is intimate with spelling should know, English has no unified body of spelling, grammar, or rules at all, therefore it’s very hard to say that one’s spelling is particularly incorrect.
Re: One of Darwin's evolution theories finally proved by Cambridge researcher
#7Proved -> Proven? Have we reached the point where basic vocabulary is too difficult for HN users now?
Re: One of Darwin's evolution theories finally proved by Cambridge researcher
#8This may be the appropriate thread to remind people that Darwin was far from the be-all and end-all of evolutionary biology and much of what he said turned out to be actually mistaken. This isn't so much of an attack on him as a celebration that we've come a long way since the 19th century. Also, you should be suspicious of any argument involving non-geneticists invoking Darwin to justify such and such social outcome - actual modern-day geneticists don't invoke Darwin for much of the same reason actual modern-day physicists don't invoke Democritus.
Re: One of Darwin's evolution theories finally proved by Cambridge researcher
#9Scientific theories are not "proven", that is not how science works. All theories are always and forever open to falsification. The scientific attitude is one of eternal doubt. "Proof" is something that only exists in the realm of pure math.
Yes, thank you. I really wish scientists (and the general public) learned more about the fundamentals of their field.
Re: One of Darwin's evolution theories finally proved by Cambridge researcher
#10Unbelievable that science still has to be proved - Aren't we living in a modern world?