Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,821 Year: 3,078/9,624 Month: 923/1,588 Week: 106/223 Day: 4/13 Hour: 0/2


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   On the Nature of Science
Woodsy
Member (Idle past 3374 days)
Posts: 301
From: Burlington, Canada
Joined: 08-30-2006


Message 1 of 6 (395527)
04-16-2007 9:07 PM


I have noted a paper in the links section that deals with the nature of science. It can be found at http://trshare.triumf.ca/...gs/PhysicsInCanada-63-2007-7.pdf
The main point made is that scientific models should be judged on their ability to make correct predictions. If a model's predictions correspond to carefully obtained observations, the model is considered to be successful.
The author also points out that the difference between science and religion is mainly that science is derived from observations while religion is derived from authoritative texts and persons.
With this account in view, I would like to ask: What correct predictions have any creationist models produced?
Also, if religion is based on arguments from (usually ancient) authority, why would one expect religion-based models to have predictive power and so qualify as science?
perhaps in Is It Science ?
Edited by Woodsy, : No reason given.

Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by pwnagepanda, posted 05-30-2007 12:20 AM Woodsy 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