Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 1/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   SCIENCE: -- "observational science" vs "historical science" vs ... science.
Coyote
Member (Idle past 2106 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


(1)
Message 315 of 614 (734743)
08-01-2014 10:06 PM
Reply to: Message 313 by Faith
08-01-2014 9:44 PM


Re: interpretive, assumption ad nauseum
It's surprising to me of course since the whole point of my argument is that reconstructing the prehistoric past can only be interpretive...
All stuff that is pure theory and can never be tested.
You use the term "interpretive" to mean automatically wrong, much as you use the term "assumption" to mean automatically wrong. And you use the term "theory" to mean wild-ass guess without any supporting evidence."
In this, it is you who errs.
I'd explain it to you but it would make no difference. It has been explained to you many times before and it is like water off a duck's back.
You have shown us you care nothing for evidence, for the standard definitions and usages of science, or for anything else that fails to support your ancient tribal myths.
Go back to riding your unicorn through Wonderland. Say, "Hi!" to the white rabbit for us.

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.
Belief gets in the way of learning--Robert A. Heinlein
How can I possibly put a new idea into your heads, if I do not first remove your delusions?--Robert A. Heinlein
It's not what we don't know that hurts, it's what we know that ain't so--Will Rogers
If I am entitled to something, someone else is obliged to pay--Jerry Pournelle
If a religion's teachings are true, then it should have nothing to fear from science...--dwise1
"Multiculturalism" does not include the American culture. That is what it is against.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 313 by Faith, posted 08-01-2014 9:44 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 316 by Faith, posted 08-01-2014 10:08 PM Coyote has replied

  
Coyote
Member (Idle past 2106 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


(1)
Message 334 of 614 (734765)
08-02-2014 12:34 AM
Reply to: Message 316 by Faith
08-01-2014 10:08 PM


Re: interpretive, assumption ad nauseum
No I do not use those words that way. The point is only that they cannot be subjected to testing or verification, which means that they are open to other interpretations.
Yes you do use those terms that way. And no, they are not open to just any random interpretation that comes wandering in off the street.
Whenever I bring up radiocarbon dating you say something to the effect, "That's just based on assumptions." Your meaning is that the method is totally unreliable because assumptions are junk.
Likewise for "interpretive." You believe that you can come up with alternative interpretations that are just as good as scientific ones. And because there are two interpretations, you are free to choose either one.
That's abject nonsense! Not all interpretations are of equal value as any but the most feeble- and slow-witted students soon learn. The interpretation "The moon is made of green cheese" soon gives way to more realistic interpretations.
The same holds for "theory." Creationists use that term to mean any idea, no matter how silly. And, as with "interpretations," if there are two theories you feel free to choose the one that suits you better no matter how little evidence there is for it. Or, one of the more recent creationists tactics, is to claim, "It's just a theory!" In other words, don't pay any attention to that, it's not anything substantive--it's just a theory.
This is far from the use of "theory" that scientists have. To a scientist, a theory is the single best explanation for a given set of facts, one which explains all of the relevant facts, and which is contradicted by no relevant facts. And, a good theory makes successful predictions. This is far different from the bastardized use of the term favored by creationists.
But you know all of this, as it has been explained to you before.
And the fact that you refuse to accept scientific terms, methods, and evidence just shows you are not doing science, but apologetics. Apologetics is (or are) the exact opposite of science.
You really need to end all of your posts here with, "Amen!" as preaching is what you are really doing (and in the Science Forum, no less).
What you are really doing here is showing how silly your positions really are. You are certainly not making any converts with specious arguments.

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.
Belief gets in the way of learning--Robert A. Heinlein
How can I possibly put a new idea into your heads, if I do not first remove your delusions?--Robert A. Heinlein
It's not what we don't know that hurts, it's what we know that ain't so--Will Rogers
If I am entitled to something, someone else is obliged to pay--Jerry Pournelle
If a religion's teachings are true, then it should have nothing to fear from science...--dwise1
"Multiculturalism" does not include the American culture. That is what it is against.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 316 by Faith, posted 08-01-2014 10:08 PM Faith has not replied

  
Coyote
Member (Idle past 2106 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


Message 355 of 614 (734870)
08-02-2014 11:54 PM
Reply to: Message 354 by Faith
08-02-2014 9:42 PM


Re: I think that observation involves interpratation
The point I'm trying to keep in mind is that in that sort of science it's testable and verifiable by others, but interpretations of some events in the prehistoric past cannot be tested or verified. I'm trying to find the best way of defining just what category of events this applies to.
Biblical myths to start with. Seen any talking snakes lately? That's the epitome of "cannot be tested or verified."
Whereas those of us who do study the distant past can readily formulate hypotheses and test them, and all of these are then subjected to testing and verification by our colleagues.
And don't think that eager young graduate students coming up aren't looking for any previous hypotheses or theories that they can overturn. That's the quickest way to become recognized.
Perhaps your idea that one can't test or verify hypotheses about the distant past is really wishful thinking? You don't like the answers we're coming up with so you are doing your best to denigrate our methods--for purely religious reasons, of course.
It appears that you've convinced yourself, but you certainly aren't coming up with any evidence that would convince anyone else here.

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.
Belief gets in the way of learning--Robert A. Heinlein
How can I possibly put a new idea into your heads, if I do not first remove your delusions?--Robert A. Heinlein
It's not what we don't know that hurts, it's what we know that ain't so--Will Rogers
If I am entitled to something, someone else is obliged to pay--Jerry Pournelle
If a religion's teachings are true, then it should have nothing to fear from science...--dwise1
"Multiculturalism" does not include the American culture. That is what it is against.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 354 by Faith, posted 08-02-2014 9:42 PM Faith has not replied

  
Coyote
Member (Idle past 2106 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


(1)
Message 371 of 614 (734958)
08-03-2014 9:30 PM
Reply to: Message 370 by Faith
08-03-2014 9:19 PM


This is the Science Forum
Just because you associate a certain time period with a certain number of millions of years doesn't mean I do.
That's just the point. Scientists rely on evidence, data, and all that real-world stuff. You do not.
You have absolutely no business telling scientists what they should and should not be doing, and how they should interpret their evidence. You have told us many times that you do not rely on evidence, so what business is it of yours trying to tell those of use who do how to do things?
You have been treated far better than you actually deserve here in the Science Forums. You have shown over the span of many threads that, as far as science is concerned, you should be told to go back to shaking your rattles and casting your spells, as those are your methodological equivalents.

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.
Belief gets in the way of learning--Robert A. Heinlein
How can I possibly put a new idea into your heads, if I do not first remove your delusions?--Robert A. Heinlein
It's not what we don't know that hurts, it's what we know that ain't so--Will Rogers
If I am entitled to something, someone else is obliged to pay--Jerry Pournelle
If a religion's teachings are true, then it should have nothing to fear from science...--dwise1
"Multiculturalism" does not include the American culture. That is what it is against.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 370 by Faith, posted 08-03-2014 9:19 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 372 by Faith, posted 08-03-2014 9:32 PM Coyote has replied

  
Coyote
Member (Idle past 2106 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


Message 373 of 614 (734962)
08-03-2014 9:48 PM
Reply to: Message 372 by Faith
08-03-2014 9:32 PM


Re: This is the Science Forum
I'm giving evidence you blithering idiot and I've never said I don't use evidence you Snark Faced idiot./
Don't you realize that when it comes to science, scientists are the ones best qualified to both determine what is and what is not evidence, and what the proper methods are with which to treat that evidence?
What you have been presenting here as evidence has been shown to be inaccurate almost all the time.
We can only conclude, from your posts, that you are trying to force the evidence to fit your beliefs, and no amount of non-fit deters you from pressing on even when confronted with solid evidence to the contrary.
Perhaps you would be happier if you just admitted you are doing apologetics, not science? That might be easier on the blood pressure.

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.
Belief gets in the way of learning--Robert A. Heinlein
How can I possibly put a new idea into your heads, if I do not first remove your delusions?--Robert A. Heinlein
It's not what we don't know that hurts, it's what we know that ain't so--Will Rogers
If I am entitled to something, someone else is obliged to pay--Jerry Pournelle
If a religion's teachings are true, then it should have nothing to fear from science...--dwise1
"Multiculturalism" does not include the American culture. That is what it is against.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 372 by Faith, posted 08-03-2014 9:32 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 374 by Faith, posted 08-03-2014 9:58 PM Coyote has seen this message but not replied

  
Coyote
Member (Idle past 2106 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


(1)
Message 387 of 614 (734982)
08-04-2014 12:09 AM
Reply to: Message 386 by Faith
08-03-2014 11:59 PM


Leave or stay
I'm trying to leave this place. It's hard to do, I keep coming back to read the posts, but I really want to leave and never come back.
Whether you leave or stay will probably depend on why you are here in the first place.
If you are here to preach and gather converts to your particular beliefs, you are doing poorly. Your style of posting is better suited to those who already believe, rather than those who are looking for evidence-based arguments.
Or, if you are here to learn, then of course you should stay. But unfortunately the evidence from your posts suggests that you are not willing to learn anything that contradicts your particular beliefs.
I for one will miss you if you leave. You have generated a huge percentage of the post/responses here of late. It would be rather dull without you.

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.
Belief gets in the way of learning--Robert A. Heinlein
How can I possibly put a new idea into your heads, if I do not first remove your delusions?--Robert A. Heinlein
It's not what we don't know that hurts, it's what we know that ain't so--Will Rogers
If I am entitled to something, someone else is obliged to pay--Jerry Pournelle
If a religion's teachings are true, then it should have nothing to fear from science...--dwise1
"Multiculturalism" does not include the American culture. That is what it is against.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 386 by Faith, posted 08-03-2014 11:59 PM Faith has not replied

  
Coyote
Member (Idle past 2106 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


(3)
Message 486 of 614 (736068)
09-01-2014 10:40 AM
Reply to: Message 485 by Percy
09-01-2014 7:32 AM


Re: Faith responds about "proof"
"Well, you can't prove it--its just a theory."
How often have we heard something similar from the creationist zealots like Faith? This does not reflect so much an ignorance of how science works as it does a complete rejection of what science is.
Creationists like Faith are inherently anti-science. They have to be.
In order to reject the findings of science that show their beliefs are wrong, they have to reject the scientific method and some of the evidence. Undermining science as somehow inherently flawed lets them cling to their beliefs.
Faith is the poster child for this.
The "observational science" vs "historical science" garbage is just the most recent attempt creationists are making to separate the sciences they agree with from the ones they have to reject. This way they don't have to take the extreme position of rejecting all of science. A simple, "Were you there?" is enough to let them convince themselves that some fields of science are inherently flawed and thus produce inaccurate results.
"Sure, we put a man on the moon. Now, that's real science! But how can you know the age of the earth? Were you there?"
What nonsense!

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.
Belief gets in the way of learning--Robert A. Heinlein
How can I possibly put a new idea into your heads, if I do not first remove your delusions?--Robert A. Heinlein
It's not what we don't know that hurts, it's what we know that ain't so--Will Rogers
If I am entitled to something, someone else is obliged to pay--Jerry Pournelle
If a religion's teachings are true, then it should have nothing to fear from science...--dwise1
"Multiculturalism" does not include the American culture. That is what it is against.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 485 by Percy, posted 09-01-2014 7:32 AM Percy has seen this message but not replied

  
Coyote
Member (Idle past 2106 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


Message 511 of 614 (736133)
09-03-2014 11:15 PM
Reply to: Message 510 by Percy
09-03-2014 3:31 PM


Re: Faith responds about "proof"
Good points, though I do think I'll try to keep things more simple in the discussion with Faith where she's claiming we can't prove anything about the distant past. Hopefully she'll eventually come to understand that we're not trying to prove things about the ancient past, we're only trying to examine and analyze evidence from the ancient past to see what it can tell us. It turns out it can tell us quite a bit.
Faith doesn't care about evidence and theory and all that scientific stuff. All she cares about is supporting and maintaining her biblical belief system.
This is what leads her to require "proof" (a level which for her is unattainable outside of the bible), rather than theory (which is the highest level of documentation that scientists use).
This is exactly the creationist mindset that leads to "You can't prove it, its just a theory." This comes not so much from ignorance, but from rejection of science and the scientific method in favor of biblical "certitudes."
Trying to convince Faith and those like her is an uphill battle, because they normally will not accept what we consider to be evidence when that evidence contradicts their biblical beliefs.
They will instead create elaborate scenarios and "what-ifs" and "potentials" that, to their way of thinking, will allow them to maintain their belief systems. When disproved, they will create new scenarios, etc. and soldier on, eventually retreating back to ones that have long since been disproved.
Evidence and facts are not acceptable if they don't support their goal, and their goal is not learning, but supporting and maintaining their beliefs. In this, science is very often the enemy, to be denied and denigrated whenever it contradicts those beliefs.
Faith and those like her are a great case-study in rationalization: as we have seen, they can rationalize most anything.
As Heinlein noted:
Theology is never any help; it is searching in a dark cellar at midnight for a black cat that isn't there. Theologians can persuade themselves of anything.
Robert A. Heinlein

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.
Belief gets in the way of learning--Robert A. Heinlein
How can I possibly put a new idea into your heads, if I do not first remove your delusions?--Robert A. Heinlein
It's not what we don't know that hurts, it's what we know that ain't so--Will Rogers
If I am entitled to something, someone else is obliged to pay--Jerry Pournelle
If a religion's teachings are true, then it should have nothing to fear from science...--dwise1
"Multiculturalism" does not include the American culture. That is what it is against.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 510 by Percy, posted 09-03-2014 3:31 PM Percy has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 512 by dwise1, posted 09-04-2014 4:25 AM Coyote has replied

  
Coyote
Member (Idle past 2106 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


Message 514 of 614 (736143)
09-04-2014 8:46 AM
Reply to: Message 512 by dwise1
09-04-2014 4:25 AM


Re: Faith responds about "proof"
If Faith wants support or at least a lack of contradiction to the contrary-to-fact claims that her fragile faith depends, then she should distance herself as far from reality as possible.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 512 by dwise1, posted 09-04-2014 4:25 AM dwise1 has not replied

  
Coyote
Member (Idle past 2106 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


Message 524 of 614 (736446)
09-10-2014 12:18 PM
Reply to: Message 523 by Taq
09-10-2014 11:12 AM


Re: Faith responds about "proof"
It is amusing to hear Faith go on and on about how science should do things, particularly as what she does is the exact opposite of science and is designed to undermine science as much as possible.

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.
Belief gets in the way of learning--Robert A. Heinlein
How can I possibly put a new idea into your heads, if I do not first remove your delusions?--Robert A. Heinlein
It's not what we don't know that hurts, it's what we know that ain't so--Will Rogers
If I am entitled to something, someone else is obliged to pay--Jerry Pournelle
If a religion's teachings are true, then it should have nothing to fear from science...--dwise1
"Multiculturalism" does not include the American culture. That is what it is against.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 523 by Taq, posted 09-10-2014 11:12 AM Taq has not replied

  
Coyote
Member (Idle past 2106 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


Message 530 of 614 (736670)
09-11-2014 10:14 PM
Reply to: Message 529 by NoNukes
09-11-2014 9:08 PM


Re: Faith responds about "proof"
Faith is wrong, but I think she is expressing herself properly. If the facts actually support both the scientific explanation as well as Faith's then the facts are not evidence for either proposition over the other.
Interpretation must be derived from facts. As such, not all interpretations are of equal value. Some stem directly from the facts, while others...not so much.
Faith has a long history of mis-interpretation of facts in order to arrive at her desired outcome. She twists, manipulates, and mis-represents facts to make her points, and most often she ignores facts which contradict her points.
And then she tries to tell us how we should do science!

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.
Belief gets in the way of learning--Robert A. Heinlein
How can I possibly put a new idea into your heads, if I do not first remove your delusions?--Robert A. Heinlein
It's not what we don't know that hurts, it's what we know that ain't so--Will Rogers
If I am entitled to something, someone else is obliged to pay--Jerry Pournelle
If a religion's teachings are true, then it should have nothing to fear from science...--dwise1
"Multiculturalism" does not include the American culture. That is what it is against.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 529 by NoNukes, posted 09-11-2014 9:08 PM NoNukes has seen this message but not replied

  
Coyote
Member (Idle past 2106 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


Message 559 of 614 (744587)
12-12-2014 11:25 PM


To recap...
Going back to the original idea of this thread:
The proposed (and false) dichotomy between "real" science and "historical" science is just another attempt by creationists to discredit or destroy the fields of science that do not agree with their ancient tribal beliefs.
But it is interesting that creationists claim one one hand to be doing "creation science" (looking for a free and undeserved ride on the good name of science) while on the other hand trying to destroy legitimate sciences with which they don't agree.
It is lies either way.

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.
Belief gets in the way of learning--Robert A. Heinlein
How can I possibly put a new idea into your heads, if I do not first remove your delusions?--Robert A. Heinlein
It's not what we don't know that hurts, it's what we know that ain't so--Will Rogers
If I am entitled to something, someone else is obliged to pay--Jerry Pournelle
If a religion's teachings are true, then it should have nothing to fear from science...--dwise1
"Multiculturalism" demands that the US be tolerant of everything except its own past, culture, traditions, and identity.

Replies to this message:
 Message 560 by William Rea, posted 12-31-2014 4:45 AM Coyote has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024