Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,808 Year: 4,065/9,624 Month: 936/974 Week: 263/286 Day: 24/46 Hour: 1/3


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   scientific theories taught as factual
nwr
Member
Posts: 6412
From: Geneva, Illinois
Joined: 08-08-2005
Member Rating: 4.5


Message 246 of 295 (448014)
01-11-2008 5:37 PM
Reply to: Message 237 by ICANT
01-11-2008 1:54 PM


Re: Sudden Appearances
I would protect it as if my life depended on it ...
And maybe they (Ethiopia) would protect it as if their diplomatic and economic relations with other nations depended on it. And that's why they might make it available (suitably protected, of course).

Let's end the political smears

This message is a reply to:
 Message 237 by ICANT, posted 01-11-2008 1:54 PM ICANT has not replied

  
nwr
Member
Posts: 6412
From: Geneva, Illinois
Joined: 08-08-2005
Member Rating: 4.5


Message 277 of 295 (448549)
01-13-2008 10:56 PM
Reply to: Message 276 by Modulous
01-13-2008 10:33 PM


Re: pedantic interjection
Gould was simply saying that since we can't say anything is 100% certain we have to view the word 'fact' as meaning something else otherwise it is meaningless.
If I measure the height of my desk as 29 inches +- .5 inches, then I call that a fact. I think I can be far more certain of that than I can of what evolutionists sometimes call facts. At least my measurement is an observation made in accordance with accepted conventions. It does not depend on any kind of interpretation of observations.
In other words, I think Gould was mistaken to say that the word "fact" would otherwise be meaningless. From my point of view, that humans are the product of evolution from other species is a well justified conclusion. However, unlike my assertion above on the height of my desk, it is not a demonstrated or demonstrable fact.

Let's end the political smears

This message is a reply to:
 Message 276 by Modulous, posted 01-13-2008 10:33 PM Modulous has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 278 by Dr Adequate, posted 01-13-2008 11:23 PM nwr has replied
 Message 285 by Percy, posted 01-14-2008 7:11 AM nwr has seen this message but not replied

  
nwr
Member
Posts: 6412
From: Geneva, Illinois
Joined: 08-08-2005
Member Rating: 4.5


Message 280 of 295 (448558)
01-13-2008 11:50 PM
Reply to: Message 278 by Dr Adequate
01-13-2008 11:23 PM


Re: pedantic interjection
Ultimately the evolutionist claim to know what things measure is based on circular reasoning. They measure things with rulers, but how do they know how long rulers are? By measuring them against other rulers! The whole thing is jusst presupposition that rulers measure the right length!
I have to disagree with that.
There is no doubt that the rulers measure the correct length, if used properly. That there is no doubt is established by the adoption of conventions. If you like, it is established by executive fiat. But it is established nonetheless. The meaning of our length words derives from those same conventions.
Evolutionists can't even decide whether things should be measured in centimeters or inches! And they call this science?
Not really a big deal, since one inch = 2.54 centimeters, also established by accepted conventions.

Let's end the political smears

This message is a reply to:
 Message 278 by Dr Adequate, posted 01-13-2008 11:23 PM Dr Adequate has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 290 by Dr Adequate, posted 01-14-2008 9:27 AM nwr has replied

  
nwr
Member
Posts: 6412
From: Geneva, Illinois
Joined: 08-08-2005
Member Rating: 4.5


Message 291 of 295 (448613)
01-14-2008 9:40 AM
Reply to: Message 290 by Dr Adequate
01-14-2008 9:27 AM


Re: pedantic interjection
You admit, in other words, that your theory is unfalsifiable, a dogma about which there can be "no doubt".
The best scientific theories are unfalsifiable. Popper's falsificationism is unfalsifiable.
This means that rulerarianism is not scientific, it is a religion.
There is no factual basis for the use of falsifiability to distinguish science from religion. It is folklore, though admittedly it is folklore that many scientists find convenient to accept.
There are clear distinctions between science and non-science, but falsifiability is not one of them.
Incidently, we are way off topic for this thread, so I don't expect to further respond on this side issue.

Let's end the political smears

This message is a reply to:
 Message 290 by Dr Adequate, posted 01-14-2008 9:27 AM Dr Adequate has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 292 by Dr Adequate, posted 01-14-2008 10:35 AM nwr has replied

  
nwr
Member
Posts: 6412
From: Geneva, Illinois
Joined: 08-08-2005
Member Rating: 4.5


Message 294 of 295 (448622)
01-14-2008 12:39 PM
Reply to: Message 292 by Dr Adequate
01-14-2008 10:35 AM


Re: pedantic interjection
You know I'm joking, right?
Certainly. But it is still off topic.

Let's end the political smears

This message is a reply to:
 Message 292 by Dr Adequate, posted 01-14-2008 10:35 AM Dr Adequate 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