Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghitulescu
Open Nature and see how many articles end with "future researches will [be needed to] prove the conclusions set forth" or similar.
|
I rarely read
Nature. But if such boilerplate, about the tentative nature of science, is endlessly repeated there, that's bad writing. Big-publisher-edited popular science titles, some authored by the same scientists, are better-written.
This is the sort of title that only gets written after a book proposal is funded by the kind of publisher which needs copyright.
Quote:
Originally Posted by gmw
Of course, you all realise how pointless this discussion is - yes? . . .
I'm talking about science eventually solving the problem of ageing: people will live forever and life+50 will be forever+50.
|
I wasn't going to put that reason at the top of the list, but I agree it's a pointless discussion
Taking your post perhaps too seriously, a cure for aging might be what it takes to get UN member states interested in a second Berne Convention.