Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 66 (9164 total)
8 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,468 Year: 3,725/9,624 Month: 596/974 Week: 209/276 Day: 49/34 Hour: 0/5


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   What is the point of this forum?
Huntard
Member (Idle past 2317 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


(1)
Message 45 of 139 (535639)
11-17-2009 4:34 AM
Reply to: Message 43 by slevesque
11-17-2009 3:46 AM


slevesque writes:
Well, no, obviously, you can't interpret the evidence in a biblical creation account framework without thinking this is the correct framework to interpret them with.
So, you admit to confirmation bias for these scientists, something completely opposite to the scientific method?

I hunt for the truth
I am the one Orgasmatron, the outstretched grasping hand
My image is of agony, my servants rape the land
Obsequious and arrogant, clandestine and vain
Two thousand years of misery, of torture in my name
Hypocrisy made paramount, paranoia the law
My name is called religion, sadistic, sacred whore.
-Lyrics by Lemmy Kilmister of Motorhead

This message is a reply to:
 Message 43 by slevesque, posted 11-17-2009 3:46 AM slevesque has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 51 by slevesque, posted 11-17-2009 4:54 PM Huntard has replied

  
Huntard
Member (Idle past 2317 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 61 of 139 (535812)
11-18-2009 4:50 AM
Reply to: Message 51 by slevesque
11-17-2009 4:54 PM


slevesque writes:
Einstein once said in a conversation with Schrodinger that ''it is the theory which determines what one can observe''.
Appeal to atuthority much?
Meaning that, in theory, it is the facts who determine the theory. But in fact, it is the theory which determines the facts.
Wrong. In science, facts dtermine the theory. If a fact is found that doesn't fit the theory, the theory is changed. See, gravity, that got changed because of Einstein.
This may sound like blasphemy, but think about it and I hope you will see that it is in fact the reality of things.
I see a very different reality.
If I'm a scientist, I don't just collect data and theorize on it afterwards. No, I start with a theory that I want to prove, and then set out to experiment to prove it.
Actually, you make predictions with your hypothesis, then do an experiment to see if your prediction comes true. If it doesn't you either discard or change the hypothesis.
Why does a scientist do 'this' experiment instead of 'that' one ?
Because the one he does is relevant to the prediction he made.
Because he thinks that 'this' one is the one that will confirm his theory.
No, because that is the way to test if the prediction was correct.
Of course, sometimes, the experiment shows a contradictory result and you are forced to change your theory.
Well then, what are you complaining about?
But most of the time, you are only going to adapt your theory as to incorporate the new data.
Well of course, a theory is, after all, a very good explanation for the world around us already, no need to discard an entire theory, when modifying it will do just fine.
Only when the new data is imposible to fit with your theory do you abandon the idea completely.
Yes. Why use the word "only" here by the way? Are there other reasons to change a theory other then the data not fitting?
this is, in essence, what Einstein was talking about. 'The theory determines what one can observe'
Then you have a weird way of explaining it, since you just admitted that we do in fact change, or even discard our theories to fit the facts.
Is this not what the early paleontologists did when evolutionnary theory came out ?
Make predictions and see if they held water? Yes.
Even when it was far from an established theory, paleontologist reinterpreted the fossils they had in terms of evolution, and every fossil discovery afterwards was fit in the evolutionnary framework.
No they didn't. They made predictions witht he theory, looked at the fossil record, and found the predictions to be accurate.
Heck, some of them even traveled solely to find the 'missing link'.
Yes, a prediction made by the theory.
The fact of evolution was not discerned from the fossils, it is rather the fossils who were fitted in the grand idea of evolution.
Wrong. The fossil record is partly why the theory became accepted. It fit the predictions made by the theory.
And I find absolutely no problem with that, because this is how science works in reality.
No it doesn't, as I have shown.
There is always a bias, what you think is true will always bias the experiments you make and how your interpret the results.
Not when using the scientific method.
Philosophers of science explained this very well, and scientists up to Einstein's days had a great understanding of the philosophy behind science, and how it works.
Which is not the way you seem to think it works.
Unfortunately, this 'culture of science/philosophy' has been somewhat lost currently, probably because of how the education sytem is built.
The scientific method remains unchanged to this day. That some people can't follow it doesn't mean the method is wrong.
By the way, this is all kinda off-topic here, this will be my last reply here on this matter. I will propose a new topic on it this evening (my time), or you can choose to propose one yourself before then if you wish.

I hunt for the truth
I am the one Orgasmatron, the outstretched grasping hand
My image is of agony, my servants rape the land
Obsequious and arrogant, clandestine and vain
Two thousand years of misery, of torture in my name
Hypocrisy made paramount, paranoia the law
My name is called religion, sadistic, sacred whore.
-Lyrics by Lemmy Kilmister of Motorhead

This message is a reply to:
 Message 51 by slevesque, posted 11-17-2009 4:54 PM slevesque has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 65 by slevesque, posted 11-18-2009 4:30 PM Huntard has not replied

  
Huntard
Member (Idle past 2317 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 118 of 139 (536150)
11-20-2009 5:40 AM
Reply to: Message 117 by dwise1
11-20-2009 4:42 AM


Re: More creationist pap
Easy there wise one.
Just highlight the text with your mouse and you can read it just fine.
But yes, he should've used a different colour. And yes, it's a load of crap.

I hunt for the truth
I am the one Orgasmatron, the outstretched grasping hand
My image is of agony, my servants rape the land
Obsequious and arrogant, clandestine and vain
Two thousand years of misery, of torture in my name
Hypocrisy made paramount, paranoia the law
My name is called religion, sadistic, sacred whore.
-Lyrics by Lemmy Kilmister of Motorhead

This message is a reply to:
 Message 117 by dwise1, posted 11-20-2009 4:42 AM dwise1 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