Unbelievable things happen but still refuse to acknowledge.

[Soontir C'boath]

We've seen many times in stories especially with characters of the scientific persuasion that when something that is "impossible" happen in front of them, they still refuse to believe it. Yet, scientists are taught to observe and extrapolate the data from the natural world around them so shouldn't they be the first people to try and understand the phenomenon that has occurred instead of disbelieving their eyes and saying "it's impossible!"?

Is this just a brain bug created by writers fiat that scientists are limited to the knowledge they gathered or is this how a scientist would normally react?

More importantly, how would you react if you saw something that couldn't be?

[Darth Wong]

We've seen many times in stories especially with characters of the scientific persuasion that when something that is "impossible" happen in front of them, they still refuse to believe it. Yet, scientists are taught to observe and extrapolate the data from the natural world around them so shouldn't they be the first people to try and understand the phenomenon that has occurred instead of disbelieving their eyes and saying "it's impossible!"?

Is this just a brain bug created by writers fiat that scientists are limited to the knowledge they gathered or is this how a scientist would normally react?

More importantly, how would you react if you saw something that couldn't be?

I've seen those kinds of thing many times, usually in magic shows. It's actually not unreasonable to dismiss an extraordinary phenomenon if you only witnessed it the same way an audience might witness a magic show in Vegas. The first thing a scientist would do is demand much more detailed and controlled measurement of this phenomenon. Accepting it at face value based on a single naked-eye viewing would be idiotic; if we use that moronic logic, then I've seen a man magically transform a beautiful young assistant into a tiger, and I shouldn't question that or else I'm being "unscientific".

[CaptainZoidberg]

What I see more often is that the scientist is portrayed as heartless or close-minded for refusing to equate a coincidence with a controlled experiment.

[Jaevric]

What kind of "it's impossible!" are we talking about?

Something like The Dresden Files where there are wizards and monsters living alongside modern society? Because I think you'd be hard-pressed to find a scientist (or anyone else who isn't already insane) who didn't have a "WTF?! That's impossible!" moment if he or she saw Harry Dresden blasting something with a stream of fire from a stick or generating a bullet-stopping shield. Or a zombie Tyrannosaurus Rex stomping through Chicago.

Scientists are supposed to understand stuff through experimentation and observation, but a lot of the things that garner a "That's impossible!" reaction violate extremely well-known and "proven" scientific theories like the aforementioned zombie T-rex.

[CaptainChewbacca]

When I read the OP, I was thinking more along the lines of some scifi show when a runaway alien gadget starts doing something 'impossible', or someone grows a new arm or something.

But, as Mike said, usually it means that its impossible 'as far as they know' and need to see more to verify HOW it has happened.

[Gullible Jones]

It's a brainbug, based on the idea that science is a set body of knowledge rather than a method. This is where you get stuff about magic being outside of the domain in science in e.g. The Dresden Files.

(Not knocking Jim Butcher or anything; but if magic actually worked, then as part of the natural world it would fall within the scientific domain, and any theory that did not attempt to explain it would be massively incorrect.)

[Timotheus]

This kind of reminds me of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle. Doyle tried to live his life like his main characer Holmes.

He even went so far as to live his life by the idea "if the plausible is discounted then the inplauable no matter how unlikely must be accepted".

I know I did not get the phrase right but you know what I mean. The problem was that life is not a story and Doyle was not as smart as his character Holmes. So in real life Doyle was conned multiple times by flim flam artists and con people, often by those who purposed the ability to speak to the dead.

Seeing is believing is a great way to be a sucker.

[Wyrm]

I had an argument with a fellow named Keener about this very issue a decade ago. His contention was that scientists were close-minded and I had to 'open my mind' to possibilities beyond. When I pointed out that I was open minded to new phenomena and trusted the scientific method, he brought up the example of (supposed) scientist Dr. Clay from Tenchi Muyo being shocked and not accepting that Tenchi could defy physics by escaping a black hole.

Had I been half the debator I am today, I would've told him, "Yeah, and anime is an accurate portrayal of how scientists and the science of physics really work. Oh wait; it's not." Mentally adding, "And you're a fucking idiot," which I couldn't do because of nanny-rules.

Not having seen the arc in question or a more solid grasp of flamewarrior skills, I pointed out that a real scientist, once verifying that the phenomenon he's seeing is real, and that it really does violate known physics, will accept that the known physics is wrong and seek to revise it. Keener kept insisting that Tenchi violated not merely known physics, but physics itself, and the reaction showed by Dr. Clay was typical and wrong; I countered that Tenchi had not violated physics itself, but slipped into a regeime where the usual rules don't apply, and that Dr. Clay wasn't acting like a scientist.

It went back and forth like that, with Keener appealing to Powers Above to say that Dr. Clay's knowledge of physics was violated, therefore physics itself is violated, and me replying that no one's knowledge physics can ever be complete, that even goddesses must obey some superphysics, and furthermore, a real scientist trusts his data and is not beholden to any dogma.

Back to the point, anything that assrapes your preconceived notions of how the universe works is going to elicit a "THAT'S IMPOSSIBLE!" response, but you don't need to be a scientist to do that: That farmboy Luke Skywalker shouted this exact line in ESB. But that's just being surprised by new and radical data. The scientists then go try to work things out, either by finding how the new data actually fits their previous knowledge, or stride forth to investigate the phenomenon, visions of Nobel Prizes dancing in their heads.

As a footnote to my debate with Keener, I finally saw the arc in question, and discovered that Dr. Clay had arrived at his physical knowledge by having it handed to him on high from a goddess, knowledge that was supposedly complete. As I suspected, he was not a scientist and did not arrive at his knowledge by the methods of science. Furthermore, the goddess was obviously lying.

[Ender]

More importantly, how would you react if you saw something that couldn't be?

What, you mean like my reaction to those bullshit claims that they found bigger meat-eating dinosaurs then the T-Rex?

[Revy]

This actually reminds me of an episode of Stargate, where Daniel is supposedly learning freaky mind powers at Kheb, and when he shows them off to the rest of the team Carter actually behaves the way I would think a scientist should.

SAM – You did that?

DANIEL – Yes.

SAM – That’s impossible.

JACK – You’d think.

DANIEL – Why?

SAM – You learned the power to control fire?

DANIEL – Its not just fire. All the instructions are here, on the walls. All you have to do is be willing to learn and believe.

SAM – I’m sorry, but something else has to be going on here.

DANIEL – Why?

SAM – I don’t know, but under different circumstances I would bring in the right equipment and check for some kind of concealed technology before I assumed that…

And it turned out she was quite right to be skeptical of what she was seeing, because it wasn't actually Daniel doing these things. Furthermore, it wasn't even magic or anything, because Daniel himself ends up arguing against such a notion much later when the Ori come onto the stage, and he tries to convince a group of primitive villagers that what they're seeing is just knowledge and technology more advanced than what they're familiar with. There was another good quote as well when Daniel is arguing with Adria, which seems to mimic the kind of disputes that come up between magic-believers and scientists;

JACKSON: No, they only believe because they've been misled. You see, to many less-developed civilizations, certain advanced technologies would strike them as supernatural in nature. Merlin wasn't a wizard, and Morgan le Fay was not a sorceress.

OSRIC: Ridiculous.

JACKSON: They simply used their advanced abilities to fashion seemingly magical creations, like the Sangraal.

OSRIC: So you would have me believe that you are possessed of a complete understanding of these amazing feats?

JACKSON: No, but just because I don't know how the trick is done doesn't make it magic.

OSRIC: And I would argue that your inability to comprehend such feats does, in fact, prove their supernatural nature.

A lot of the Ori arc was pretty much about convincing people that the Ori didn't do 'magic' and weren't some gods that could do absaloutely anything, just very advanced people with more advanced science than us.

[Kanastrous]

This kind of reminds me of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle. Doyle tried to live his life like his main characer Holmes.

He even went so far as to live his life by the idea "if the plausible is discounted then the inplauable no matter how unlikely must be accepted".

I know I did not get the phrase right but you know what I mean. The problem was that life is not a story and Doyle was not as smart as his character Holmes. So in real life Doyle was conned multiple times by flim flam artists and con people, often by those who purposed the ability to speak to the dead.

Seeing is believing is a great way to be a sucker.

Once you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains - no matter how implausible - must be the truth.

[Darth Wong]

This kind of reminds me of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle. Doyle tried to live his life like his main characer Holmes.

He even went so far as to live his life by the idea "if the plausible is discounted then the inplauable no matter how unlikely must be accepted".

I know I did not get the phrase right but you know what I mean. The problem was that life is not a story and Doyle was not as smart as his character Holmes. So in real life Doyle was conned multiple times by flim flam artists and con people, often by those who purposed the ability to speak to the dead.

Seeing is believing is a great way to be a sucker.

Once you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains - no matter how implausible - must be the truth.

That quote is actually a logical fallacy; it assume that you are aware of all the possible explanations. There may be an explanation which you simply haven't thought of yet, which is neither impossible or implausible.

[Kanastrous]

I think it's a nice reflection of Holmes' intellectual arrogance. Which goes toward character development, even though it's admittedly fallacious.

[Zixinus]

On the very original question, the thing is that even scientists are humans too: they will be shocked, surprised and have natural disbelief before they move on and start trying to understand what's going on. That's how it works because that's how human beings react.

If a scientist doesn't believe the apparently impossible on first sight, that's a fairly human reaction. If not after a while, that's when the scientist starts becoming an idiot.

(Not knocking Jim Butcher or anything; but if magic actually worked, then as part of the natural world it would fall within the scientific domain, and any theory that did not attempt to explain it would be massively incorrect.)

I love his books, but I do have this quirk with Butcher: his idea of a sceptic is someone disbelieving magic when they have a freaking lup-ga-ru in the building and killing people. The same person was also practically hiding when all the other officers were fighting.

Oh, and when he portrayed a sceptic again, it was an ancient and merciless vampire that fed on children.

[Xon]

If a scientist doesn't believe the apparently impossible on first sight, that's a fairly human reaction. If not after a while, that's when the scientist starts becoming an idiot.

Like say Dana Scully from the X-Files, sure the viewer is priviliged, but she is so damn thick.

Scully was also practically a fundamentalist christian, so any claims of her being an actual skeptic are somewhat unbelievable.

[VT-16]

I used to love the blatant hypocracy and contradictions on the X-Files:

Scully (on UFOs and aliens): "Mulder, that must have been swamp gas/light from Venus/trauma from your sister's disappearance/electromagnetic disturbance generating illusions."

Scully (on religious phenomena): "Mulder, it's a demon from the seventh circle of Hell! We must protect the chosen child!!!"

At least it was fun until the umpteenth Angelic visitation/alien shapeshifter bounty hunter episode.

[Majin Gojira]

My frustration with this cliche has spurned me in my writing. There are two sketpical characters in one of my current works: one fills the role of "Magnificeng Bastard" allowing the harder edged skeptisism to still garner some audience Sympathy...for a character best described as the spawn of Light Yagami and David Xanatos.

When confronted with the unknown, she says nothing about it until she holds it down and disects it.

The other skeptic is more casual, his response to the new and bizzare being "Well, that was different."