|
Author
|
Topic: So Just How is ID's Supernatural-based Science Supposed to Work? (SUM. MESSAGES ONLY)
|
Buzsaw
Inactive Member
|
|
Message 76 of 396 (439244)
12-07-2007 9:33 PM
|
Reply to: Message 1 by dwise1
11-27-2007 2:39 PM
|
|
dwise1 writes: Here is basically how science currently works. We observe the natural world and form hypotheses to try to explain what we observe. Then we test those hypotheses by using them to make predictions and then either conducting experiments or making further observations. Those hypotheses which prove correct are kept and subjected to further testing, while those that don't pan out are either examined for what's wrong with them and they either get discarded or a correction is attempted which is then subjected to further testing. Out of this process we develop a bundle of hypotheses which are used to develop a theory, a conceptual model of the natural phenomena in question and which describes our understanding of what that phenomena are and how they operate. That theory is used to make predictions and it is tested by how good those predictions are; thus the theory undergoes further testing and refinement and correcting. And that testing is not performed solely by the developers of the theory, but also by other members in the scientific community who have a vested interest in finding problems in that theory because they may be basing their own research on that theory -- if that theory turns out to be wrong, then they want to know that before they start their own research based on it. Now, an extremely valuable by-product of all this hypothesis building and testing is questions. In science, the really interesting and valuable discoveries are the ones that raise new questions. Because questions help to direct our research. Because by realizing what we don't know and what we need to find out, we know what to look for and we have some idea of where to find it. Without those questions, science loses its direction and gets stuck.
(embolding mine) VERY GOOD, Dwise1.
dwise1 writes: Science cannot use supernaturalistic explanations, because they don't explain anything. We cannot observe the supernatural either directly or indirectly; we cannot even determine whether the supernatural even exists. Supernaturalistic explanations cannot be tested and hence cannot be evaluated nor discarded nor refined. They cannot produce predictions. They cannot be developed into a conceptual model that could even begin to attempt to descibe a natural phenomena nor how it works. And supernaturalistic explanations raise absolutely no questions and so provide absolutely no direction for further research. "Goddidit" explains nothing and closes all paths of investigation. Supernaturalistic explanations bring science to a grinding halt. OOPS! This means no questions pertaining to higher intelligence than earthbound humans, no questions as to whether archeology supports an intelligence higher than humanity, no questions pertaining to the accuracy of the ancient Biblical record relative to archeology etc, no questions pertaining to evidence of supernatural ID, no questions pertaining to alternative hypotheses relative to ID interpretation of what is observed. So perhaps mainline secularist science's aversion to asking questions is indeed missing out on valuable and new discoveries as per your statement.
Dwise1 writes: In Message 245 I wrote: And from what I understand of the Wedge Document, ID's goal is not really to "teach the controversy", but rather it is to eliminate evolution and to pervert science into their own image, effectively killing science as well. But as it stands, secular science's goal is not really to 'teach the controversy', but rather it is to eliminate ID creationism and to pervert science into their own image, effectively killing science as well.
BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW. The immeasurable present is forever consuming the eternal future and extending the infinite past.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 1 by dwise1, posted 11-27-2007 2:39 PM | | dwise1 has replied |
|
Buzsaw
Inactive Member
|
bluescat48 writes: Not to eliminate ID but to get the IDers to come up with a testable model to show that it is scientific. IDers are effectively eliminated. They cannot now even ask the questions, let alone discuss models in most schools.
BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW. The immeasurable present is forever consuming the eternal future and extending the infinite past.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 77 by bluescat48, posted 12-07-2007 11:08 PM | | bluescat48 has not replied |
|
Buzsaw
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 91 of 396 (439410)
12-08-2007 6:27 PM
|
Reply to: Message 78 by dwise1
12-08-2007 2:11 AM
|
|
dwise1 writes: First, it is absolutely ridiculous to include "questions pertaining to the accuracy of the ancient Biblical record relative to archeology" in your list, since archeology has indeed been actively pursued at biblical sites and, I'm sure, is still being pursued. Second, can you see what you wrote? You're taking issue with science not pursuing questions leading to attempting to research the supernatural. Hello? Just how do you expect science to deal with the supernatural? You just brought us right back to the fundamental question I asked in the OP and that we have repeatedly posed to IDists and which those same IDists have dodged: just how exactly does ID expect science to test supernaturalistic explanations? Since you want science to incorporate the supernatural, you must be prepared to answer that question. A good starter would be for National Geographic's marine scientist/archeologist/explorer, Dr. Robert Ballard to at least go to the Gulf of Aqaba and explore the site marine biologist, Dr. Lennart Moller has researched, witten about and produced videos of the underwater photographed corral encased debris which resembles chariot parts, in a region described in the Biblical record including corroborating evidence relative to the Exodus account and Red Sea crossing. Why aren't the educational institutions calling for Mollar presentations of his marine research and professional underwater photography, etc? To my knowledge no secularist scientists have even shown any interest in this phenominal discovery. Why? Likely because it has supernatural implications which secular science purposfully avoids. So again, perhaps mainline secularist science's aversion to asking questions is indeed missing out on valuable and new discoveries as per your statement. And again, as it stands, secular science's goal is not really to 'teach the controversy', but rather it is to eliminate ID creationism and to pervert science into their own image, effectively killing science as well (applying some of your own phraseology).
BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW. The immeasurable present is forever consuming the eternal future and extending the infinite past.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 78 by dwise1, posted 12-08-2007 2:11 AM | | dwise1 has not replied |
|
Buzsaw
Inactive Member
|
Supernatural Not All That Mysterious
Hi Granny. Greetings and welcome to EvC. Evidence of the supernatural relative to science must of necessity be above the example you've given. It must involve the sciences of archeology, exploration, physical observation and historical research etc. It may as well include mathmatical probabilities, statistics, geneology, verifiable prophecy fulfillment and such. My understanding is that none of this is being allowed in the public educational arena.
BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW. The immeasurable present is forever consuming the eternal future and extending the infinite past.
|
Buzsaw
Inactive Member
|
Supernatural Not All That Mysterious
OOPS double post. Edited by Buzsaw, : No reason given.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 79 by Granny Magda, posted 12-08-2007 5:48 AM | | Granny Magda has not replied |
|
Buzsaw
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 101 of 396 (439450)
12-08-2007 8:49 PM
|
Reply to: Message 99 by nator
12-08-2007 8:01 PM
|
|
What is your response to the specifics of my message 91 relative to your questions?
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 99 by nator, posted 12-08-2007 8:01 PM | | nator has not replied |
|
Buzsaw
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 102 of 396 (439451)
12-08-2007 8:50 PM
|
Reply to: Message 97 by jar
12-08-2007 7:08 PM
|
|
Re: How do you present the evidence
What is your response to the specifics of my message 91 relative to your questions?
BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW. The immeasurable present is forever consuming the eternal future and extending the infinite past.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 97 by jar, posted 12-08-2007 7:08 PM | | jar has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 104 by jar, posted 12-08-2007 9:02 PM | | Buzsaw has not replied | | | Message 124 by nator, posted 12-09-2007 3:17 PM | | Buzsaw has not replied |
|
Buzsaw
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 103 of 396 (439452)
12-08-2007 8:51 PM
|
Reply to: Message 98 by RAZD
12-08-2007 7:22 PM
|
|
Re: How do you present the evidence
What is your response to the specifics of my message 91 relative to your comments?
BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW. The immeasurable present is forever consuming the eternal future and extending the infinite past.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 98 by RAZD, posted 12-08-2007 7:22 PM | | RAZD has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 107 by RAZD, posted 12-08-2007 9:43 PM | | Buzsaw has replied |
|
Buzsaw
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 105 of 396 (439458)
12-08-2007 9:03 PM
|
Reply to: Message 99 by nator
12-08-2007 8:01 PM
|
|
schraf writes: What are the predictions of ID? What are the potential falsifications? How have they been tested? To get into the specifics of ID relative to science, would be leading off topic. Relative to topic, dwise1 asks how ID's supernatural based science can work. My message 91 offers one example of science supportive to the supernatural which secular science has ignored. If Dwise and you folks want an answer, we have to begin some place. That's what I'm attempting to do.
BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW. The immeasurable present is forever consuming the eternal future and extending the infinite past.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 99 by nator, posted 12-08-2007 8:01 PM | | nator has not replied |
|
Buzsaw
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 108 of 396 (439481)
12-08-2007 10:12 PM
|
Reply to: Message 106 by ringo
12-08-2007 9:42 PM
|
|
Ringo writes: But there's nothing there that's "supportive of the supernatural". Even if the chariot wheels (or whatever) were real, there's no need for a supernatural explanation. Moller could just as well be claiming a supernatural element in gravity or scotch tape. Oh, but there is supportive evidence, especially when you factor in the Biblical record relative to all the corroborative Exodus related evidence in the region on both sides of the crossing discovery. These have all been discussed and debated in the archives of EvC. This is not the place to go into all that but it exists physically for anyone who is interested and has the expertise, finances, time and equipment to research as has been expended by the Biblicalists involved in all of this effort over the years. My point is that here is falsifyable evidence which can be studied, researched and explored by secularists as Dr. Moller has done but secular science has no interest in researching anything which would be supportive to a higher realm intelligence existing in the universe. Furthermore, anything supportive to the Biblical record implicates accountability to a higher power which secularism is reluctant to acknowledge.
Ringo writes: If you're going to explain how supernatural-based science can work, the God-did-it part can't be something that has a simple natural answer. Come, let us reason together. Neither the God-did-it or the it-did-itself has a simple natural answer. How about exposing it all to the school kiddies as well as the universities who train the teachers etc and let the chips fall where they may? 
BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW. The immeasurable present is forever consuming the eternal future and extending the infinite past.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 106 by ringo, posted 12-08-2007 9:42 PM | | ringo has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 111 by ringo, posted 12-08-2007 11:15 PM | | Buzsaw has replied |
|
Buzsaw
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 109 of 396 (439488)
12-08-2007 10:24 PM
|
Reply to: Message 107 by RAZD
12-08-2007 9:43 PM
|
|
Re: How do you present the evidence
Razd, shouting off topic and crying "hoax" serves no useful purpose. That word "supernatural" relative to intelligent design in the topic title implies a supernatural being, does it not? How are we going to get anywhere in this discussion aside from first establishing that evidence is out there which is supportive to a higher realm of intelligence as in intelligent design. That's where we must begin, is it not? ABE: My question to you is if it's all a hoax, what secularists have even made an effort to go out there and prove it to be such? Edited by Buzsaw, : No reason given.
BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW. The immeasurable present is forever consuming the eternal future and extending the infinite past.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 107 by RAZD, posted 12-08-2007 9:43 PM | | RAZD has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 110 by jar, posted 12-08-2007 10:48 PM | | Buzsaw has not replied | | | Message 132 by RAZD, posted 12-12-2007 8:42 PM | | Buzsaw has not replied |
|
Buzsaw
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 112 of 396 (439531)
12-08-2007 11:34 PM
|
Reply to: Message 111 by ringo
12-08-2007 11:15 PM
|
|
Ringo, obviously you haven't viewed the Dr. Moller video "Exodus Revealed" or read the Dr. Moller Book, "The Exodus Case," which are available all over the web. There's a whole lot more scientific research here than a picture of a chariot wheel. Dr Moller presents the evidence and leaves the conclusions up to the reader or viewer. My point is that evidence like this supportive of higher intelligence/ID should be exposed to the universities and public schools for the folks to be aware of relative to this topic to be fair and balanced. As per the thread title, supernatural-based science hasn't a prayer so long as this kind of evidence is prohibited in educational institutions and so long as secular science has no interest in looking at it.
BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW. The immeasurable present is forever consuming the eternal future and extending the infinite past.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 111 by ringo, posted 12-08-2007 11:15 PM | | ringo has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 113 by ringo, posted 12-08-2007 11:42 PM | | Buzsaw has not replied | | | Message 120 by Percy, posted 12-09-2007 8:57 AM | | Buzsaw has not replied |
|
Buzsaw
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 147 of 396 (480947)
09-07-2008 10:52 PM
|
Reply to: Message 122 by PaulK
12-09-2007 9:26 AM
|
|
Re: Badmouthing Creationists MO
PaulK writes: I'd say that Buzsaw and Beretta have been demonstrating it for us. Supernatural "science" is twisting misrepresenting or ignoring the evidence in service to preestablished ideas which are taken as dogmatic fact. That and attacking anyone who sees through the charade as being "blinded" (for refusing to blind themselves). It's not a pretty sight. Yah sure, PaulK, like citing the evidence of the Exodus in the region of Aqaba, questioning the properties of space capable of two ends of a perfectly straight rod connecting themselves without bending, questioning where and when the BB occured, having had no space nor time existing for the event to have happened etc. Who's going to bring up these things for debate if we don't? And when are we going to get substantive believable answers for some of these things? When are the secularist archeologists and researchers going to go in and refute the Exodus evidence we've cited? Edited by Buzsaw, : No reason given.
BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW. The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 122 by PaulK, posted 12-09-2007 9:26 AM | | PaulK has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 148 by PaulK, posted 09-08-2008 1:22 AM | | Buzsaw has replied |
|
Buzsaw
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 149 of 396 (480972)
09-08-2008 8:40 AM
|
Reply to: Message 148 by PaulK
09-08-2008 1:22 AM
|
|
Re: Badmouthing Creationists MO
PaulK writes: In other words claiming to have evidence that you refuse to produce and attacking science you don't understand. PaulK, if you understand how space has the ability to reconnect the two ends of an absolute straight bar without bending the bar, perhaps it's time for a new thread on just that one alleged property of space so that you can explain to the www what property of space allows for this to happen. That space allegedy has the property of curvature does not explain the magic of how it allegedly would reconnect the bar's ends without bending the bar. What model has science concocted to show that to be possible? Until you or someone can answer that question, the Buzsaw Hypothesis relative to infinite unbounded space stands unrefuted.
BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW. The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 148 by PaulK, posted 09-08-2008 1:22 AM | | PaulK has replied |
|
Buzsaw
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 151 of 396 (480984)
09-08-2008 10:34 AM
|
Reply to: Message 150 by NosyNed
09-08-2008 9:20 AM
|
|
Re: bent bars
NosyNed writes: General Relativity. And it works very, very, very well. The unanswered question remains; what properties of space render space capable of connecting the two ends of an absolute straight unbended bar?
BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW. The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 150 by NosyNed, posted 09-08-2008 9:20 AM | | NosyNed has replied |
|
™ Version 4.2