You asked how do mothers know they have all the data.
It doesn't matter. They are just drawing conclusions on the data. And because the data is so complete thioer common sense tells them the conclusion is right. In fact in the baseball case falsification could of said the ball was a plant with even of had been sent thru another window to put glass in it to coply the room in question. Yet a mother wouldn't go this far in testing her "hypothesis".
To be clear the scientific method is not a analysis statement of what takes place when we in daily life draw conclusions. Otherwise we all would literally be scientists.
NO it is a METHOD to examine systematically data to draw conclusion.
The Method is needed where it is needed. And it is needed where the data does not clearly tell the tale.
YES the method can be used step by step as in the baseball analagy to determine a past event. However the data is so complete as to nullify any actual need for a Method to draw a conclusion. Its practically (but not) observed.
Indeed one could offer a video of the event as a test of the hypothesis but why the hypothesis in the first place with such great evidence?
In origin subjects the Method is a needed thing to draw conclusion on scant (your word) evidence.
And creationists say the method is not employed here because it can't be. Not just that conclusions are wrong but that the method isn't used at all. It can't test its hypothesis about past events and processes.
And then I went too far in saying NO past event can be used by the Method. It seems it can but only because the data is SOOOO complete. In fact so complete as to make it irrelvant to use the Method in the first place.
You said science looks for plausible natural mechanisms. Agreed
However for it to claim it has found one by its special method,well this must be demonstrated.
That what it found was by the method.
And past and gone events and processes in these cases have not been brought under the scrunity of the Method. They are historical speculation.
Our great question here is still Is it Science? When dealing with what Toe etc asserts.
And we say No it is not science.
Rob
™ Version 4.2
