[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: cs lewis
> I can't believe I'm reading such hypocrisy from a scientist who so
> blatantly ignores the scientific method. You must first have a
> hypothesis to first be able to test it and gather "evidence", right?
Not necessarily. Sometimes you stumble across evidence, and you are
forced to create a hypothesis to account for it. Scientists believed in
*some* notion of evolution long before Darwin proposed natural selection,
because they saw fossils in layers of rock, and they could see that the
fossils changed -- and perhaps grew more complex -- over time.
All Darwin did was propose a new and significant way of fine-tuning the
hypothesis, and scientists since his day have continued that process.
> As for me, I really don't buy into the whole big bang thing or
> speciation.
But haven't we seen speciation occur, just in the past century?
> Which leads me to my next point, whatever is currently widely accepted
> in science is never safe from criticism.
Exactly. Which is why the *method* of criticism is all-important. And
"creation science", by and large, has no method. It uses whatever methods
work, to get from Evidence A to Conclusion B, and it will switch methods
or use contradictory methods so long as it gets the "right" results.
And that's just not science.
--- Peter T. Chattaway --------------------------- peter at chattaway_com ---
"I detected one misprint, but to torture you I will not tell you where."
Winston Churchill to T.E. Lawrence, re Seven Pillars of Wisdom
---------------
Unsubscribe by going to http://www.actwin.com/MediaNation/OtR/
References: