Peanut Gallery

Ask your mum if her research counts as "soft science".

So the better evidenced a theory becomes the less scientific it becomes because the less likley it is to be falsified?Dude - That's just mental.

The sidewise figure eight, ∞, is also the symbol for infinity . . . which is probably how long it will take . . .Enjoy

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

---

Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

Hi xongsmith,You're getting there, slowly, certainly closer than anyone else. Aside from the issue of whether "beyond all reasonable doubt" means that bluegenes can dismiss anything that doesn't fit with his worldview, your point is that nothing will be viewed as a supernatural occurrence, that anything seen will be explained by natural means ... or dismissed as not having enough evidence to explain it by natural means ... leaving any such evidence to be dismissed as "god of the gaps" rather than supernatural.This leads us to something that necessarily cannot be explained and that can be shown to be impossible to explain by natural means. This last element is not possible in science, so the "test" cannot be done.Enjoyps - I am posting here because bluegenes has chosen to post here: if admin wants to sanction me then both of us should be sanctioned.

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

---

Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

Why don't you just participate in the actual Great debate in question? And if you don't want to but Xong thinks he has a case why doesn't he take over?Bluegenes never specified you as the only person he was willing to defend his theory against.

Straggler comments: Not any theory - perhaps it can reworded another way...each new piece of evidence in support of any scientific theory has also become evidence of the analemma. I would not say that any of these theories has become less scientific - that seems a bit overboard. Although I can see how it could be worded this way. Yes! Right! I think you're beginning to get it. This is something that maybe could have been in Hofstadter's Godel, Escher & Bach book on things that are self-referential. My analemma is somewhat like a scientific theory about scientific theories.When you check it out against bluegenes theory, this is where the strangeness of scientific theories gets exposed. bluegenes has made a theory that studies natural versus supernatural stuff, but my analemma predicts that there never will be any supernatural stuff in any scientific conclusions, therefore his theory cannot be falsified in the usual sense. The system breaks down at this point. Either we abandon Falsifiability in this single instance OR we argue that any actual supernatural phenomenon outside of human imagination cannot be scientifically investigated. It's like a singularity in the geometric fabric of scientific investigation.

---

- xongsmith, 5.7d

I have. I've demonstrated that there is no theory, not in the scientific usage of the term.I've been waiting for one piece of actual evidence from the supposed great extravagance of objective empirical evidence.I've been waiting to see how one tests for falsification - the methodology.Something more than wishful thinking coupled with confirmation bias and cognitive dissonance.I've been waiting for honest debate of the LACK of support for the concept to be anything other than a conjecture, rather than pseudoskepticism and bluster.Curiously, I am not the only one who sees the failure in bluegenes posts.Enjoy.Edited by RAZD, : scientific

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

---

Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

Is the second law of thermodynamics weakened as a falsifiable scientific theory evertime someone fails to make a perpetual motion machine?

Straggler to RAZD: Sorry - I was under the impression that a Great Debate is 1 against 1 and that the rest of us cannot participate. I suppose you mean to start a new Great Debate between bluegenes & me? Aside from the fact that I really don't want to do that, I also happen to like the dog-piling I get here.

---

- xongsmith, 5.7d

And you have been told all these things.Dude - Take it to the Great Debate. And if you don't want to GB bluegenes any further either pass on the baton to someone who can or tell us which of the numerous alternatives (myself, Mod etc.) you think should take over Bluegenes role. Curiously none of those who seem to dispute bluegenes theory can agree on what they actually mean by the term "supernatural". See Inductive AtheismMaybe it would help if you told us what you mean by "supernatural" because I suspect your definition will conflict with that of your supporters.

Given that RAZ has abandoned the thread we are supposedly peanutting why don't you just take over if you think you have a valid rebuttal of Bluegene's argument?Edited by Straggler, : No reason given.

I'm sorry - was there something supernatural in the 2nd Law? Is this an oblique reference to Maxwell's Little Demons? Tell me, get me up to speed. I confess to my ignorance in this matter.

---

- xongsmith, 5.7d

It's just not my cup of tea....

---

- xongsmith, 5.7d

Can you prove that the second law isn't obeyed because some superntural entity invisibly wills it so?How is what you are demanding different?

A) Then why are you here?B) Copout!!!