Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The delusion that science is the pursuit of facts or truth. Science has one major goal:
To test a process using a control and a test subject. And possibly another test subject to gauge the difference from each and the control.
Once a process has been tested enough, it becomes a law. But even laws can have exceptions. That is, I'm sure when Wright invented airplanes, I'm sure people said it couldn't be done. I'm sure people people also said the same about gravity
So even laws are not immune to criticism. The purpose of science? To test what we know until it is disproven.
Science could be the pursuit of information. New ideas. Instead, its urge to verify everything leaves anything that is "unfalsiable" outside consideration.
Re the part I put in BOLD: I thought it becomes a theory, not a law.
I'll let you guys quibble over the definition of science.
I guess I am having trouble with the word "unfalsiable". I think new scientific research could uncover new data or evidence, which would not necessarily make the previous research false. Anyway, that is just getting too far off the topic of Dems booing prayer, which I don't think was the case.
Location: In a little house on the prairie - literally
10,202 posts, read 7,920,960 times
Reputation: 4561
Quote:
Originally Posted by _redbird_
I guess I am having trouble with the word "unfalsiable". I think new scientific research could uncover new data or evidence, which would not necessarily make the previous research false. Anyway, that is just getting too far off the topic of Dems booing prayer, which I don't think was the case.
The common example of the application of falsification is that the theory of evolution would be proven false the moment one finds rabbit fossils in the Precambrian layer. In other words, all precepts would go out of the window, as the TOE clearly states that should be impossible.
On the other hand, the YEC suggestions (their suggestions are not even hypothesis, and certainly not a theory) can never be tested, and as such are invalid. A good discussion of the concept is here:
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
