Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 85 (8924 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 08-17-2019 10:30 PM
24 online now:
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: Jedothek
Post Volume:
Total: 859,867 Year: 14,903/19,786 Month: 1,626/3,058 Week: 404/868 Day: 43/70 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The $5,000,000 ID Research Challenge
Drosophilla
Member (Idle past 1866 days)
Posts: 172
From: Doncaster, yorkshire, UK
Joined: 08-25-2009


(4)
Message 144 of 285 (686343)
12-31-2012 12:50 PM
Reply to: Message 121 by tesla
12-15-2012 10:44 AM


Re: spend it on space exploration/ Brain research.
Hello Tesla

I firmly believe that one day (if the human race does not go extinct) that greater consciousness will be found--and even a true concept of God, and the higher emotion felt and relayed as 'The holy Ghost'--will better be understood

I firmly BELIEVE? You are invoking a priori thought system here and you want to talk about ID qualifying as a science?

You do know the checklist for the Scientific Method don't you?

1. Make observations in the REAL universe (not some fantasy scenario thought up in one's head).
2. Postulate hypothesis that explains the observations.
3. Check the hypothesis by experimentation/corroborating evidence - there MUST be positive predications that can be verified.
4. Define the conditions of FALSIFIABILITY - hint - it is even more important to describe what a hypothesis CANNOT do than what it can. A hypothesis that can glibly say everything is possible is NFG.
5. Subject to corroboration of point 3 and that identified falsifiables do not in fact occur in the scenario under consideration, move tentatively towards the powerful scientific theory, whilst all the time being prepared to modify or completely trash the hypothesis in the light of new evidence.

Above all, the hypothesis/theory must be validated by REAL evidence in the REAL universe.

If the above 5 point scientific method is not strictly followed then the practitioner is NOT doing science no matter what shit they think.

Here is an example of the scientific method at work:

1. OBSERVATION: Life on Earth is very diverse with many organisms adapted for life in numerous ways. Linnaen taxonomy indicates a 'tree of life'. How did this come about?

2. HYPOTHESIS: Life on Earth originated from a common ancestor and diversified as a result of mutation and natural selection and enabled by geographic (amongst other) barriers that separate groups of individuals and allow speciation and variation to proceed.

3. VERIFY BY EXPERIMENT/EVIDENCE CORROBORATION: If life started from a common ancestor and diversified there will be evidence of this in the genetic make up of species which will reflect the ordering. This will also be apparent in the fossil record and species population demography to name but a few fields.

4. HOW IS THIS HYPOTHESIS FALSIFIED?: There should be a strict ordering of fossils according to time (no rabbit fossils in the pre-Cambrian) and no innovative features should 'jump' lines (i.e. the correctly wired cephalopods eyes suddenly jumping into late developed mammals eyes) to name just two major falsifiable factors for the above hypothesis -even one example in either of the two factors would totally trash the hypothesis.

5. After 150 plus years of observation and experimentation, point no. 3 is in the affirmative and point no. 4 has no evidence of falsifiability (despite the conditions being given that allow it to be so) so ....the hypothesis becomes the ToE in all its strength.

Now....

Please list the scientific methodology for ID. I would be particularly interested in your descriptors of the FALSIFIABILITY section. This should read as in the example above - REAL statements that can be checked in the real world. If you cannot do this then ID cannot conform to the Scientific Method and is NOT science.

You are aware of the background to ID, the Wedge Strategy and the dishonesty it all implies aren't you?

Edited by Drosophilla, : No reason given.

Edited by Drosophilla, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 121 by tesla, posted 12-15-2012 10:44 AM tesla has acknowledged this reply

Replies to this message:
 Message 145 by Coyote, posted 12-31-2012 12:57 PM Drosophilla has responded

  
Drosophilla
Member (Idle past 1866 days)
Posts: 172
From: Doncaster, yorkshire, UK
Joined: 08-25-2009


(1)
Message 146 of 285 (686346)
12-31-2012 1:02 PM
Reply to: Message 145 by Coyote
12-31-2012 12:57 PM


Re: Methodology for ID
The Bible says it, I believe it, that settles it.
(But don't say that! We've got to pretend we're doing science!)

Indeed! I can't wait to see how he provides falsification for something he can't even vaguely describe.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 145 by Coyote, posted 12-31-2012 12:57 PM Coyote has not yet responded

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019