[Terrapreta] The Science of Terra Preta Formation

[David Hirst .com]

Kevin,

I do so agree with you about the importance of hypothesis & speculation. What if is a
necessary and important first step.

I suspect to become "scientific" hypothesis has to have two further features:

1.       It must not violate known facts or deeply established theories. This can be very
demanding as there is so much known that might need to be recognised.

2.       It must be "falsifiable". That is there should be some tests or experiments you
could do that would produce results that disprove the hypothesis.

If no tests have yet been discovered that show the hypothesis to be false, it becomes
reasonable to adopt it as "provisional" truth, and use it in your planning and
decision-taking. Just as we adopt the law of gravity as the best explanation around for
planetary movement, and only tweak it when we include relativity. 

I am not sure a hypothesis can be "proven", merely accepted as the best explanation we
have.

Does this mean that a hypotheses has an associated test, whereas speculation is a
predecessor, giving a model upon which one can construct experiments?

Speculation is still quite fun.

Cheers

David

David Hirst

 

david at davidhirst.com

 

-----Original Message-----
From: terrapreta-bounces at bioenergylists.org
[mailto:terrapreta-bounces at bioenergylists.org] On Behalf Of Kevin Chisholm
Sent: 06 April 2008 05:09
To: Sean K. Barry
Cc: 'Terra Preta'
Subject: Re: [Terrapreta] The Science of Terra Preta Formation

 

Dear Sean

 

Sean K. Barry wrote:

> Hi Kevin,

>  

> There is much archeolgical evidence about pottery shards in TP.

 

I would not call it evidence, so much as I would call it "Archeological 

Observations." They have loads of archeological observations about the 

nature of pottery shards and their presence in Terra Preta. These 

observations have indeed been used as evidence to support the hypothesis 

that Terra Preta has been made by Man.

> As far

> as I know, nobody has presented a proven, credible explanation for the

> presence or purpose or significance of the pottery shards found in TP.

 

Exactly! I have seen nothing to show that pottery shards are a necessary 

constituent to Terra Preta, or equally, nothing to show that it is not a 

necessary constituent. It seems to me that the pottery shards have been 

observed and assessed as archeological curios, with little to no effort 

to explain how they got into the TP, or why they are there, or their 

significance to TP manufacture.

> I think it might be more productive to observe what pottery evidence 

> there is and speculate to form a hypothesis for how it was used,

 

What would would you look for in the pottery shards, or how would you 

propose that these Archeological Observations be further used as 

evidence?  Do you not need to first pose a hypothesis, and then seek to 

prove or disprove it? How do you know what to look for, if you do not 

first have a hypothesis?

> rather than speculate or hypothesize a use and then go looking for 

> evidence to support that speculation.

 

Any hypothesis is a "speculation":

 

   1. A tentative explanation for an observation, phenomenon, or

      scientific problem that can be tested by further investigation.

   2. Something taken to be true for the purpose of argument or

      investigation; an assumption.

   3. The antecedent of a conditional statement.

 

Demanding that one presents proof before one formulates a hypothesis is 

very unscientific. A "cart before the horse" condition.

> The reason I say this is that the evidence supports the whole process, 

> development of the hypothesis and support of that hypothesis.

 

In my opinion,  you have it exactly in reverse. In my opinion, the 

process is:

1: Form an initial hypothesis

2: Refine the initial hypothesis and develop it further

3: Find evidence to prove or disprove the hypothesis.

 

This is how I am proceeding. I formed and posted my initial hypothesis, 

and sought comment from this Forum. Isn't that a reasonable, methodical 

and Scientific way to proceed? I am in the process of analysing the 

feedback, with a view to refining the hypothesis. Evidence is not 

necessary to form a hypothesis. Rather, evidence is necessary to prove 

or disprove a hypothesis.

>   It is a weaker argument only to confirm the consequence or 

> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_ignorance

That reference is irrelevant at the stage of the formation and 

development of a hypothesis. However, it is very relevant at the stage 

where proof or disproof of a hypothesis is being claimed.. However, we 

are not there yet... I am still working on development of a hypothesis 

to explain the origin and development of Terra Preta.

 

It is impossible to prove or disprove a hypothesis until after the 

hypothesis is stated. An Archeological observation or phenomenon is not 

evidence unless it is being used to prove or disprove a hypothesis. As 

far as I am aware, the only use of pottery shards as actual evidence is 

to support the Terra Preta Anthropogenic Hypothesis, that Man was 

involved in the production of Terra Preta.

 

Best wishes,

 

Kevin

> 

> Regards,

>  

> SKB

> 

>     ----- Original Message -----

>     *From:* Kevin Chisholm <mailto:kchisholm at ca.inter.net>

>     *To:* Tom Miles <mailto:tmiles at trmiles.com>

>     *Cc:* 'Terra Preta' <mailto:terrapreta at bioenergylists.org>

>     *Sent:* Saturday, April 05, 2008 5:28 PM

>     *Subject:* Re: [Terrapreta] The Science of Terra Preta Formation

> 

>     Dear Tom

> 

>     Tom Miles wrote:

>     > Kevin,

>     >

>     > One example is petrography used by paleobotanists and

>     archaeologists to

>     > identify the mineral components in terra preta pottery shards,

>     as described

>     > in references like Amazonian Dark Earths.

>     >  

> 

>     That good work is more of an observation of what we can see now about

>     Terra Preta, but it tells little or nothing about how Terra Preta was

>     made, or how to make it now. That is more "The Archaeology of Terra

>     Preta", rather than "The Science of Terra Preta Formation."

> 

>     Once a credible theory or hypothesis for Terra Preta Formation is

>     presented, THEN we will know what archeological evidence to look

>     for to

>     confirm or negate the hypothesis.

> 

>     There is much archeolgical evidence about pottery shards in TP. As

>     far

>     as I know, nobody has presented a proven, credible explanation for

>     the

>     presence or purpose or significance of the pottery shards found in TP.

> 

>     Do you have a credible explanation for why the pottery shards, as

>     Archaelogical realities, are found in Amazonian TP?

> 

>     Best wishes,

> 

>     Kevin

>     > Tom

>     >

>     >  

>     >> -----Original Message-----

>     >> From: Kevin Chisholm [mailto:kchisholm at ca.inter.net]

>     >> Sent: Saturday, April 05, 2008 2:10 PM

>     >> To: Tom Miles

>     >> Cc: 'Terra Preta'

>     >> Subject: The Science of Terra Preta Formation

>     >>

>     >> Dear Tom

>     >>

>     >> Tom Miles wrote:

>     >>    

>     >>> ...del...

>     >>>

>     >>> We've had both science and speculation about how it all began in

>     >>>      

>     >> Terra

>     >>    

>     >>> Preta de Indio in the Amazons and how it can be recreated. And

>     we've

>     >>> tried to maintain a modest reading list/bibliography on the

>     website.

>     >>>

>     >>> http://terrapreta.bioenergylists.org/biblio

>     >>>

>     >>>      

>     >> What would you say is the Science of Terra Preta formation?

>     >>

>     >> Thanks.

>     >>

>     >> Kevin

>     >>

>     >>    

>     >

>     >

>     >

>     >  

> 

> 

> 

>     _______________________________________________

>     Terrapreta mailing list

>     Terrapreta at bioenergylists.org <mailto:Terrapreta at bioenergylists.org>

>     http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/biochar/

>     http://terrapreta.bioenergylists.org

>     http://info.bioenergylists.org

> 

 

 

 

_______________________________________________

Terrapreta mailing list

Terrapreta at bioenergylists.org

http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/biochar/

http://terrapreta.bioenergylists.org

http://info.bioenergylists.org

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: /attachments/20080406/d4aaccfd/attachment.html