Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 59 (9025 total)
49 online now:
dwise1, hooah212002, nwr, PaulK, ringo, Stile (6 members, 43 visitors)
Newest Member: JustTheFacts
Post Volume: Total: 883,264 Year: 910/14,102 Month: 313/597 Week: 91/96 Day: 8/28 Hour: 0/4


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   A Year In Intelligent Design
caffeine
Member
Posts: 1799
From: Prague, Czech Republic
Joined: 10-22-2008


(2)
Message 49 of 50 (844710)
12-04-2018 12:07 PM
Reply to: Message 42 by Stile
12-03-2018 2:21 PM


Re: Creation Science vs Regular Science
The only way for Science to disagree on the conclusion of a test is to do the test again and show an error in the previous test (generally resulting in Nobel Prizes for catching an error.)
Which would still result in only 1 valid test - and only 1 valid conclusion.

I think you have to find an error in something pretty important to get a Nobel prize - if they handed them out every time someone fixed a mistake there'd be a lot more laureates.

Edited by caffeine, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 42 by Stile, posted 12-03-2018 2:21 PM Stile has acknowledged this reply

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2021