quote:
Originally posted by outblaze:
So, evolution meets steps 1-3, but fails on 4-6. It is not testable, not reproduceable, and not verifiable. In fact, if we really are honest, it also fails on step 1 as it is not observable. Different species being here is, but evolution is not. So evolution does not fit any of secular science's requirements outside of being a hypothesis. So its not science.
But it SURE fits the definition of religion to a T.
True and pure science would say this - The earth is older than we are. There have been animals alive longer than we ourselves. Some of these animals, to our knowledge, are not alive any longer. Some of these animals have died and their bones have been burried and fossilized.
That's it. Anything more adds untestable, unreproduceable, unverifiable religously held belifes to the facts.
There are several significant errors and misunderstandings in your interpretation of what science is.
1. Most of science does not depend on direct observation. It is based on testing predictions that derive logically from hypotheses. We certainly don't know the structure of the atom or the mechanism of gravity by direct observation.
2. The processes and mechanisms driving evolutionary change (such as natural selection in all its forms, genetic drift, random mutation) CAN and HAVE BEEN observed both in the lab and in the wild. It is undisputable fact that evolution has occurred. Many of the mechanisms and processes are also facts - they HAVE been directly observed. There is no "faith" involved. Whereas details of the mode and tempo of evolution (the theory part) may be disputed - and is, often acrimoniously among scientists - the fact of evolution is not in doubt.
3. Science is manifestly NOT simply a catalog of phenomena. Although that does constitute a part of science - an important part, in fact, otherwise there would be no observations upon which to base hypotheses - it is not the only or even the most important aspect of scientific endeavor. I have certainly done enough baseline studies and species catalogs to attest to this! However, science also seeks to provide explanations for
why a particular phenomenon occurs. Science consists of posing testable, falsifiable hypotheses; making predictions about what is not yet known; performing critical experiments or observations that can disprove certain alternatives and lend support to others; seeking explanations; and subjecting ideas to the rather critical examination of other scientists. This epistemology or "way of knowing" is the direct antithesis of religion and faith, which rely on blind, dogmatic adherence to the traditional tenets of their belief.
Evolutionary hypotheses CAN be tested. Based on the predictions made observations or data can be accumulated that falsify the ideas. No science, including evolutionary biology, relies on immutable Truth (tm). Every science consists of provisionally accepted hypotheses. Progress in science - every science - consists of challenging established views with new ideas and experiments. Can ANY religion or belief system even come close to saying the same?
™ Version 4.2