Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,806 Year: 3,063/9,624 Month: 908/1,588 Week: 91/223 Day: 2/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Is creationism science?
Straggler
Member
Posts: 10333
From: London England
Joined: 09-30-2006


Message 59 of 114 (371685)
12-22-2006 4:46 PM
Reply to: Message 51 by 4Pillars
12-21-2006 9:52 AM


Re: Science by Definition is Phylisophical
Try as you might but there is no such thing as an authoritative definition of science or the scientific method. Scientists and philosophers of science until today are in disagreement on it and struggle to define all of its essential attributes. So for evolutionists to claim that creationism is not science simply begs the question
Whilst what you say here does have some validity this does not mean that every method of investigation can be considered scientific. This is the logical consequence of your statement. Unless you are claiming that any investigation, no matter it's methods or aims, is scientific you are going to have to argue your case for including creationism as science a little more thoroughly.
Science produces scientific conclusions by evaluating and analysing physical evidence to produce these conclusions.
The methods of science such as prediction, independent verification, peer review, repeatable experimentation etc. are the best ways we have of verifying the objective validity of these conclusions.
Creationism produces no scientific conclusions as the conclusions are drawn from faith based texts with no regard to physical evidence.
Only once the conclusions have been made is evidence for them sought.
This is the very opposite of science.
For this reason creationist conclusions are not scientific and are not able to withstand the tests of refutation, verifiable prediction etc. etc. I am in fact unaware of any creationist research which even attempts to verify it's results through testable prediction (any examples?).
Hence creationism is not science.
Darwins theory on the other hand has not only withstood the potential refutation of increased understanding of inheritence (i.e genetics) it has actually been enhanced by it.
The subsequent rsearch into genomes has validated the conclusions beyond all reasonable doubt as all the empirical evidence is entirely consistent with evolution by natural selection and genetic mutation exactly as predicted by theory.
It is not brainwashing or some sort of large scale conspiracy as many creationists seem to suggest. Creationism is the result of faith based conclusions and evolution is the result of dilligent and long running evidence based research.
One is very definitely science and one is very definitely not.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 51 by 4Pillars, posted 12-21-2006 9:52 AM 4Pillars 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