A place to ask questions and add to probative and informative discussions associated with the various aspects of the field of fire investigation. -- FORUM RULES---BE CIVIL AND NO NAME CALLING, NO BELITTLING, NO BERATING, NO DENIGRATING others. Postings in violation of these rules can be removed or editted to remove the offending remarks at the discretion of the moderators and/or site administrator.
Re: Scientific Method
Posted by:
dcarpenter (IP Logged)
Date: May 06, 2022 08:42AM
The reliable application of the SM is so fundamental and accepted that there does not tend to be peer-reviewed articles on the subject. In addition, because of ignorance, most are not aware that there are remaining issues with the reliable application of the SM.
If you consider NFPA 921 to be a peer-reviewed document, then these issues have been argued and the current position of 921 is that the Process of Elimination as expressed as Negative Corpus has been rejected as a reliable methodology. I am well aware that the document states that the process of elimination is an integral part of the SM. This is not an accurate statement. Falsification an integral part of the SM.
I believe that this is the next battle ground issue in FI. That is, how to reliably apply the SM to a specific set of data to reach reliable determinations.This has been the foundation for some of the most effective Daubert arguments and challenges.
I am currently writing an article on this subject for submission to a peer-reviewed journal. I understand that we have a disagreement on these concepts and further discussion may not resolve those disagreements. However, your continued participation in these discussions has helped me understand the alternative view of The Process of Elimination and the SM in FI. Thank you.
Douglas J. Carpenter, MScFPE, CFEI, PE, FSFPE
Vice President & Principal Engineer
Combustion Science & Engineering, Inc.
8940 Old Annapolis Road, Suite L
Columbia, MD 21045
(410) 884-3266
(410) 884-3267 (fax)
www.csefire.com