Ka-pi96 said:
The raw data perhaps, but that's why scientists publish papers with their theories and all the information they have to back it up. Sure it would still be more complicated to follow than say a recipe book or something, but the average person should still be able to read it and understand why the scientist is presenting that theory and that there is a factual basis suggesting it could possibly be true. That's kind of why scientists publish stuff, to give people evidence to back up their claims and so it isn't just them saying "this happens because I said it does. Look at all my fancy degrees, that means you should just trust me!". |
A lot of science (let's say, modern physics) can't be reduced to a format where it is verifiable for the layman, without introducing fallacies.
Bet with PeH:
I win if Arms sells over 700 000 units worldwide by the end of 2017.
Bet with WagnerPaiva:
I win if Emmanuel Macron wins the french presidential election May 7th 2017.