|
Author
|
Topic: Discovery or Ignorance: The Choice Is yours?
|
John 10:10
Member (Idle past 3025 days) Posts: 766 From: Mt Juliet / TN / USA Joined: 02-01-2006
|
Re: What We Mean by Theory
"Theory" is the highest accolade that a modern scientist can give to an idea. It will only be used when there is a wealth of evidence to support the idea (although "theory" is used in a looser sense within physics). An idea with no supporting evidence is, at best, a hypothesis. Again I disagree. The highest principle a scientist, old or modern, can give to an idea is "proof" that one understands cause and effect to a high degree of accuracy, and that the results can be repeated over and over again to a high degree of consistency. This evolution cannot nor ever will be able to do. I agree with the following quote:
quote:
It would be better to say that particles-to-people evolution is an unsubstantiated hypothesis or conjecture.
Also, if you want to quote Bible passages, I recommend that you put short passages right here on the page, instead of forcing others to look them up, because I guarantee that most people won't bother to look them up. This is exactly what I want them to do, if they are genuinely interested in what the Bible has to say. Otherwise, I'm just wasting my time and yours as well. Edited by John 10:10, : spelling error
|
John 10:10
Member (Idle past 3025 days) Posts: 766 From: Mt Juliet / TN / USA Joined: 02-01-2006
|
|
Message 50 of 402 (473901)
07-03-2008 2:13 PM
|
Reply to: Message 48 by NosyNed
07-03-2008 1:38 PM
|
|
Re: More misunderstanding
True science looks at things that can be proven (substantiated) to a very degree of accuracy, not theories can that never be proven (substantiated).
The evolutionary model is just such a thing. It is supported by so much evidence that it has an extremely high probability of being true. No such thing!!! All the evolutionary model has are bits and pieces of an evolutionary particles-to-people process that is nothing but unsubstantiated hypothesis or conjecture. True science is dealing with cause and effect facts that can be repeated to a high degree of accuracy over and over again. Edited by John 10:10, : added word
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 48 by NosyNed, posted 07-03-2008 1:38 PM | | NosyNed has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 59 by NosyNed, posted 07-03-2008 4:07 PM | | John 10:10 has not replied |
|
John 10:10
Member (Idle past 3025 days) Posts: 766 From: Mt Juliet / TN / USA Joined: 02-01-2006
|
Re: What We Mean by Theory
Close, but no cigar. As Nosy has pointed out above, "proof" is part of mathematics. Scientists deal in evidence. Yes, scientists and true science deal with evidence that can be repeated over and over again to a high degree of consistency. This is proof for the scientist that one can contain the power of nuclear fission and engineer it to produce electric energy, or into a bomb if one chooses to do so. Show us the evidence that the evolutionary model works from start to finish?
|
John 10:10
Member (Idle past 3025 days) Posts: 766 From: Mt Juliet / TN / USA Joined: 02-01-2006
|
|
|
Message 53 of 402 (473907)
07-03-2008 2:49 PM
|
Reply to: Message 51 by Brian
07-03-2008 2:15 PM
|
|
But there is no difference. Science arrived at the conclusion that life evolves by looking at the evidence, not the other way round. True science arives at conclusions by substantiating cause and effect, not just looking at life forms and making conjectures that life could possibly evolve in this or that way. This is where the evolutionary model has gotten far off track, proclaiming itself as true science when if fact it is not.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 51 by Brian, posted 07-03-2008 2:15 PM | | Brian has not replied |
|
John 10:10
Member (Idle past 3025 days) Posts: 766 From: Mt Juliet / TN / USA Joined: 02-01-2006
|
|
|
Message 55 of 402 (473909)
07-03-2008 3:06 PM
|
Reply to: Message 54 by dwise1
07-03-2008 2:50 PM
|
|
I doubt very much that he had encountered very many scientists at the power plants, if any at all. Engineers and technicians, yes, but not scientists. I have a great respect for true scientists who deal with substantiating cause and effect, but not much respect for those who live with Si-Fi rather than true science. Yes, engineers live in a real world as it is substantiated to be, not in a fairy tale world you want it to be.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 54 by dwise1, posted 07-03-2008 2:50 PM | | dwise1 has not replied |
|
John 10:10
Member (Idle past 3025 days) Posts: 766 From: Mt Juliet / TN / USA Joined: 02-01-2006
|
True science arives at conclusions by substantiating cause and effect ... You know that doesn't mean anything, right? This tells me and others volumes about your understanding of what true science is all about.
It's these people called "scientists". Who know science when they see it. And who don't get all muddly and confused over the basic terms and concepts of science like you do. The ones who deal with substantiating cause and affect know and understand true science. The rest attend your university.
|
John 10:10
Member (Idle past 3025 days) Posts: 766 From: Mt Juliet / TN / USA Joined: 02-01-2006
|
So perhaps instead of arrogantly shooting your mouth about what is and isn't scientific, a subject of which you evidently know damn-all, perhaps you ought to find out some of the things that scientists know about science and you don't. Like what science is and what scientists do. When you don't have a rational answer to reason with, you attack the messenger. Some science!
|
John 10:10
Member (Idle past 3025 days) Posts: 766 From: Mt Juliet / TN / USA Joined: 02-01-2006
|
Re: What We Mean by Theory
Are you suggesting that past events cannot be studied scientifically? I would hope that you would not be so foolish. No I am not! I am saying that past events should be studied and verified that they are true, and can be consistently repeated when tested.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 58 by Granny Magda, posted 07-03-2008 3:46 PM | | Granny Magda has not replied |
|
John 10:10
Member (Idle past 3025 days) Posts: 766 From: Mt Juliet / TN / USA Joined: 02-01-2006
|
Re: What We Mean by Theory
He claims to have been an engineer at many nuclear powerplants. A scary thought! We should run! Nuclear power is producing 20%+ of the electric energy needs of our country, and about 80% in France. How many watts of power have you helped produce?
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 60 by Tanypteryx, posted 07-03-2008 4:10 PM | | Tanypteryx has not replied |
|
John 10:10
Member (Idle past 3025 days) Posts: 766 From: Mt Juliet / TN / USA Joined: 02-01-2006
|
|
|
Message 67 of 402 (473933)
07-03-2008 6:38 PM
|
Reply to: Message 61 by bluegenes
07-03-2008 4:53 PM
|
|
Re: You're an ape, John
I can show you conclusive evidence that you descend from a common ancestor with the chimps, John. Do you want to see it, or does that frighten your cowardly soul? I know whom I descended from, and into whose family I now belong to. You may join the apes if you like.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 61 by bluegenes, posted 07-03-2008 4:53 PM | | bluegenes has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 69 by bluegenes, posted 07-03-2008 7:08 PM | | John 10:10 has replied |
|
John 10:10
Member (Idle past 3025 days) Posts: 766 From: Mt Juliet / TN / USA Joined: 02-01-2006
|
|
|
Message 68 of 402 (473934)
07-03-2008 6:44 PM
|
Reply to: Message 64 by Coyote
07-03-2008 6:07 PM
|
|
Re: "True science" and other lies
I've noticed that fundamentalists are now using the term "true science" in an effort to disassociate the theory of evolution from the rest of science.
Isn't this known as bearing false witness? Read my lips! True science is simply the explanation of how things are the way they are, and how they came be as they are, proven by testing results that can be accurately measured and duplicated time and time again. When the theory(s) of evolution can do this, then they will have something they can call true science.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 64 by Coyote, posted 07-03-2008 6:07 PM | | Coyote has not replied |
|
John 10:10
Member (Idle past 3025 days) Posts: 766 From: Mt Juliet / TN / USA Joined: 02-01-2006
|
|
|
Message 71 of 402 (473945)
07-03-2008 8:37 PM
|
Reply to: Message 69 by bluegenes
07-03-2008 7:08 PM
|
|
Re: You're an ape, John
I think you're scared of the truth, John. A frightened little ape, hiding behind his Bible. The evidence is there, John, in every cell of your body there is information, visible only with a microscope, that tells us that you're an ape. Is this the best dialogue that evolutionists can descend to? Yes, every cell of my body knows exactly where it belongs and where every other cell is. Just how do you think it figured this all out without a Designer/Creator?
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 69 by bluegenes, posted 07-03-2008 7:08 PM | | bluegenes has replied |
|
John 10:10
Member (Idle past 3025 days) Posts: 766 From: Mt Juliet / TN / USA Joined: 02-01-2006
|
Re: "True science" and other lies
Hey, John, where'd you come up with the term "true science"? Maybe you can enlighten us as to what is wrong with my definition which reads as follows:
True science is simply the explanation of how things are the way they are, and how they came be as they are, proven by testing results that can be accurately measured and duplicated time and time again.
|
John 10:10
Member (Idle past 3025 days) Posts: 766 From: Mt Juliet / TN / USA Joined: 02-01-2006
|
|
|
Message 74 of 402 (473948)
07-03-2008 8:48 PM
|
Reply to: Message 72 by Coyote
07-03-2008 8:41 PM
|
|
Re: You're an ape, John
Natural selection and descent with modification. Maybe a little founders effect and other similar things.
At least there is evidence for this. There is no evidence for a designer -- that's a religious belief. So that's how the DNA of cells figured out how to become DNA in the first place. OK, show me the evidence?
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 72 by Coyote, posted 07-03-2008 8:41 PM | | Coyote has replied |
|
John 10:10
Member (Idle past 3025 days) Posts: 766 From: Mt Juliet / TN / USA Joined: 02-01-2006
|
Re: "True science" and other lies
Your definition is not incorrect, it is simply your branding of it as "true science." Evolution fits all of your restrictions, yet you deem it as not "true science." Evolution fits no such definition. Show us where evolution has been tested "with results that can be replicated time and time again." All the sciences that are "true science" do this. Evolution cannot nor ever will be able to do this. Therefore, evolution cannot ever be called true science, and will always be relegated to the realm of speculation, not true science.
|
™ Version 4.2