Canadian Amber, Fin-Tailed Dinosaurs, and a Despairing Blogger

Science, as a process, promotes an adversarial system. A scientist poses an hypothesis from an observation, then attempts to refute this hypothesis through further observations arrived at from experimentation and testing, and poses a further hypothesis from the results; if it stands, he can make a claim that a thing is, or isn’t. Another scientist comes along and attempts to refute that finding, and so on and so forth. We can presume that scientist A and scientist B are both using the same data or are merely increasing the data used to make observations, and that the same data is included by further authors, thus merely expanding the perspective. But it seems there are adversaries, and there are enemies. Some scientists, against seeming logic, will not even regard the same datasets offered, and use this as refutation of previous datasets or observations. Science, we presume, is not served when workers talk past one another, or make claims that a thing simply is, without any substantiation for why.

Bupkis

Bupkis n. (alt. sp. bupkus, bupkiss) [Yid. באָבקעס bobkes, “(large) beans”]

1. absolutely nothing; nothing of value, significance, or substance. [Wiktionary]

Ex.: We searched for hours and found bupkis.

2. ”nothing,” zip, zilch, zero. [Urban Dictionary]

Ex.: I’ve got bupkiss.