Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,425 Year: 3,682/9,624 Month: 553/974 Week: 166/276 Day: 6/34 Hour: 2/0


EvC Forum ⇒ Science Forums ⇒ Is It Science? ⇒

Scientific Fact versus Interpretation

Thread ▼ Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Scientific Fact versus Interpretation
NosyNed
Member
Posts: 9003
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003

Normal Thread Display
Message 91 of 144 (296122)
03-16-2006 11:24 PM 		Reply to: Message 90 by jar
03-16-2006 10:41 PM

New Topic on ICR video?
Perhaps Buzz can start a new topic on it. He could present the individual pieces of ICR evidence one at a time.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 90 by jar, posted 03-16-2006 10:41 PM jar has replied
Replies to this message:
 Message 92 by jar, posted 03-16-2006 11:25 PM NosyNed has not replied
  
NosyNed
Member
Posts: 9003
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003

Normal Thread Display
Message 107 of 144 (296465)
03-18-2006 11:20 AM

The point is it that it doesn't matter
It doesn't matter how it is stated by scientists. It is up to all of us to examine the reason why any statement is made. We should understand how a conclusion was arrived at and decide for ourselves how much speculation and how much fact is involved in it.
Replies to this message:
 Message 108 by Faith, posted 03-18-2006 11:46 AM NosyNed has not replied
  
NosyNed
Member
Posts: 9003
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003

Normal Thread Display
Message 134 of 144 (296763)
03-20-2006 10:00 AM 		Reply to: Message 130 by Silent H
03-20-2006 7:39 AM

Another hit against Faith thesis too
I note Holmes that the summary of that paper is yet another refutation of Faiths idea about "interpretations" being offered as "fact".
​
In about 5 sentences we see:
​
quote:
... that are commonly interpreted as suture zones...
​
quote:
...suggest that fabrics related to assembly...
​
quote:
... the agreement between these data sets suggests that...
​
quote:
... and may record assembly of...
​
quote:
...geochronologic data suggest that...
​
quote:
...we propose that ... may have involved a complex...
​
This reaally puts the lie to the kind of nonsense that some here are spouting.
​
And then we have this wonderful line!!! Worthy of a lite POTM and really caps off the entire debate:
​
Faith writes:
​
You can't require me to read an entire article, holmes.
​
Oh dear, an entire article.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 130 by Silent H, posted 03-20-2006 7:39 AM Silent H has replied
Replies to this message:
 Message 137 by Silent H, posted 03-20-2006 10:27 AM NosyNed has replied
  
NosyNed
Member
Posts: 9003
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003

Normal Thread Display
Message 138 of 144 (296776)
03-20-2006 10:34 AM 		Reply to: Message 137 by Silent H
03-20-2006 10:27 AM

Same "kind" so makes no difference.
Or was that a jackass? I forget.
​
See the post title (hint, hint at using appropriate post titles !!! )
This message is a reply to:
 Message 137 by Silent H, posted 03-20-2006 10:27 AM Silent H has not replied
  
Date format: mm-dd-yyyy
Timezone: ET (US)
  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024