Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 63 (9045 total)
128 online now:
AZPaul3, Christian7, nwr (3 members, 125 visitors)
Newest Member: maria
Upcoming Birthdays: AdminPhat
Post Volume: Total: 887,135 Year: 4,781/14,102 Month: 379/707 Week: 110/197 Day: 54/16 Hour: 5/10


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   A Year In Intelligent Design
caffeine
Member (Idle past 11 days)
Posts: 1800
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