Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,806 Year: 3,063/9,624 Month: 908/1,588 Week: 91/223 Day: 2/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   New Questions--moral perspective
Mammuthus
Member (Idle past 6474 days)
Posts: 3085
From: Munich, Germany
Joined: 08-09-2002


Message 65 of 73 (91330)
03-09-2004 8:10 AM
Reply to: Message 63 by Servant2thecause
03-09-2004 1:12 AM


Re: 'just' a theory
quote:
In regards to "evolution is as proven as any other theory," you are wrong. Sorry, but no amount of arguing, essay-writing, quoting "famous scientists," field research, or laboratory observations are going to prove beyond any reasonable doubt that evolution is more than just another "what-if" of science.
This is not directed at Saviourmachine (Mammuthus meant Servant...can't tell these guys apart ) in particular but this part of the post struck me as a pretty good summary of the fundamental lack of understanding of science exhibited by creationists. On the one hand saviormachine says "no amount of...field research or laboratory research are going to prove beyond any reasonable doubt..." yet creationism should be accepted as supported (not taking into account that there is no testable or falsiable hypothesis to begin with) because there is NO field research or laboratory research that supports it? One should take the "theory" that explains nothing over one that explains the observed biodiversity on the planet and is supported by mountains of evidence from multiple disciplines? In addition, that saviourmachine uses the word "prove" also demonstrates that he does not understand that all science, be it the theory of gravity or the theory of evolution is tentative. Nobody "proves" in science. The best theory is the one that survives the constant scrutiny of methodological naturalism. Evolution is one of the most robust theories in science because lab and field research constantly supports it. If data comes along that directly contradicts the theory, the theory will have to be revised or discarded. So far it has not but there is constant scrutiny by thousands of scientists to see if it holds up. Creationists certainly do not scrutinize their beliefs...they assume they are correct a priori and demand that you accept it.
[This message has been edited a total of 12 times and then redacted from !Kung and other click languages to prove Queztal was wrong and I was right 03-08-2004]
[This message has been edited by Mammuthus, 03-09-2004]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 63 by Servant2thecause, posted 03-09-2004 1:12 AM Servant2thecause has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 66 by Quetzal, posted 03-09-2004 8:47 AM Mammuthus 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