The real Difference between Science (Evolution) and Pseudo-Science (Creationism)

In science if the evidence doesn't fit the theory, the theory is thrown out and a new one is based on the evidence.In pseudo-science if the evidence doesn't fit the theory, the evidence is thrown out or ignored and they continue to search for evidence which will fit their theory because belief is more important than facts.

quote:

---

Originally posted by nos482:
In science if the evidence doesn't fit the theory, the theory is thrown out and a new one is based on the evidence.

​

In pseudo-science if the evidence doesn't fit the theory, the evidence is thrown out or ignored and they continue to search for evidence which will fit their theory because belief is more important than facts.

---

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++I would modify the first to say that if there is conflicting evidence the theory has to account for it or be thrown out i.e. if after sequencing the entire chimp and gorilla genomes we find that gorillas our the closest to Homo that will not cause evolution to be thrown out. However, if we found that gorillas had an almost identical genome to catfish then genetics, evolution, and just about all molecular biology would go straight out the window.pseudoscience does not provide a testable hypothesis so there is no way to gather evidence in the first place. However, in certain cases, statements of specific pseudosciences can be refuted but the evidence is usually ignored by the faithful.

Originally posted by Mammuthus:I would modify the first to say that if there is conflicting evidence the theory has to account for it or be thrown out i.e. if after sequencing the entire chimp and gorilla genomes we find that gorillas our the closest to Homo that will not cause evolution to be thrown out. However, if we found that gorillas had an almost identical genome to catfish then genetics, evolution, and just about all molecular biology would go straight out the window.

​

pseudoscience does not provide a testable hypothesis so there is no way to gather evidence in the first place. However, in certain cases, statements of specific pseudosciences can be refuted but the evidence is usually ignored by the faithful.Exactly. Scientists are willing to learn from their errors, pseudoscientists aren't.

Agree. I add something: Science knows its limits, pseudoscience has no limits.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Andya Primanda:
Agree. I add something: Science knows its limits, pseudoscience has no limits.

---

This is where the "it's only fair, what do you have to fear" comes in when creationists want "creation science" taught in schools along with evolution as an "alternative" view.