Is “good evidence” a subjective or objective determination?

[T.G.G. Moogly]

Objective facts are true even if the overwhelming majority rejects them.

Before one can accept this one has to have decided what is real. I'm reminded of an experience from very early childhood. A police officer was telling us about traffic safety, crossing streets safely, looking in both directions, etc. He said that if you see a car coming toward you and you cover your eyes because you're afraid, the car doesn't go away. That really stuck with me.

[steve_bank]

By definition facts are indisputable. A car is going 50 mph.

In general the problem is in proving something is indeed a fact and not supposition or conjrecture. Again a Perry Mason episode.

[fromderinside]

Basically I watched the whole original Perry Mason series recently. There is no way a Perry Mason episode relates to establishing facts.

Very twisty. Something is always missing when Perry gets the loser to confess. There is no scene to which one can refer that the person actually did the deed. there is only the word picture Perry draws when accusing.

[steve_bank]

Basically I watched the whole original Perry Mason series recently. There is no way a Perry Mason episode relates to establishing facts.

Very twisty. Something is always missing when Perry gets the loser to confess. There is no scene to which one can refer that the person actually did the deed. there is only the word picture Perry draws when accusing.

It surely does. How the application of logic goes goes from tne subjective and circumstantial to objective truth.

Glad to see my old nemesis is still rolling around.

[Lion IRC]

By definition facts are indisputable. A car is going 50 mph.

In general the problem is in proving something is indeed a fact and not supposition or conjecture...

I thought the problem was that 50 miles per hour is a disputable 'fact' because space/time is relative and not objectively observable from inside the uni/multiverse.

[steve_bank]

By definition facts are indisputable. A car is going 50 mph.

In general the problem is in proving something is indeed a fact and not supposition or conjecture...

I thought the problem was that 50 miles per hour is a disputable 'fact' because space/time is relative and not objectively observable from inside the uni/multiverse.

There are 3 general levels of science. Relativistic where things go very fast and time dilation becomes significant. Newtonian here on the surface which governs things like baseballs and jets, and quantum where thongs are very small like atoms.

All measurers are relative in that they are refernced to a point or standard. If something weighs 1o kg it is relative to the kg standard.. The philosophical bombshell Einstein dropped was that there are no absolutes.

Velocity is relative to an in inertial frame an xyz set of axis in space. A space ship in motion is an inertial frame.


Two cars one at 50 mph and the other at 70 mph have velocities relative to the ground. To the 50 mph car the 70 mph car is moving at 20mph faster to its inertial frame.

People on the ISS are aging differently than those on the ground. Relativistic corrections for time dilation have to made for GP clocks on Seattleites ab\nd the ground.

Thanks for the rep comment. We all sorely need civility.

The global reference points are Stem International or SI. Google SI units NIST and you will find an explanation and list of units.

[skepticalbip]

By definition facts are indisputable. A car is going 50 mph.

In general the problem is in proving something is indeed a fact and not supposition or conjecture...

I thought the problem was that 50 miles per hour is a disputable 'fact' because space/time is relative and not objectively observable from inside the uni/multiverse.

If you thought that then you would be wrong. Someone in a different reference frame would still agree that the car was traveling at 50mph in the reference frame in which that measurement was made.