Induction and Science

I would rather call this as Deduction. In this case, there are 3 different people perhaps from the same family. They all wore black shoes. Deduction will fit in here better than induction.If this has to be induction, then this could follow other queries like: Why did they wear Black Shoes? What is special about the black color? One of them must be wearing women's shoes etc.

Naturalistic philosophers are only promoting Evolution. Scientists are the only ones who have difficult time in finding evidence. They did not find the evidence and on this basis, propose the theory.But,they proposed the theory before the evidence. Darwin himself was fearful about the fossil evidence and the missing link.How can they find Scientific evidence for a Philosophical theory?This message has been edited by inkorrekt, 03-01-2006 09:01 PM

You are right on. Some theories become facts as and when evidence is provided.Other theories stay as theories because, there is no evidence.

Hypothesis become a theory only when it is backed by evidence.Today, evolution is still a theory when all the evoltionists are desperate to find any evidence.

I never said that. The issue here is the evidence. However, the entire argumant is turned into God Vs Science. That means there can be no logical reasoning. Alright I will accept your premise if you can define life and explain how life came into existence.I will refer you to the Best selling book by Ann Coulter Religion of the Liberals( Godless) She has an interesting chapter on Evolution.