25 Oct 09
Originally posted by robbie carrobie…but of whether evolution is scientific. can it be subject to falsification? is it subject to the scientific model?
it is strange that you fail to make the distinction between the evolutionary hypothesis and science, thus by beginning with a premise or should i say an assumption, your evaluation is doomed from the beginning. The whole tenure of the argument, is not the validity of evolution, nor of the Bible and making a comparison, but of whether evolution is scientific. can it be subject to falsification? is it subject to the scientific model?
If any theory of evolution (or anything else) is not in principle subject to falsification, then it is not science. My point was that, when any empirical discovery/observation falsifies (or at least modifies) some previously held belief, that hardly invalidates science.
I, perhaps, should have italicized the “some”—as in “some religionists”.
25 Oct 09
Originally posted by vistesdthe tone was inherent in the wording, or at least i thought so!
[b]…but of whether evolution is scientific. can it be subject to falsification? is it subject to the scientific model?
If any theory of evolution (or anything else) is not in principle subject to falsification, then it is not science. My point was that, when any empirical discovery/observation falsifies (or at least modifies) some previously ...[text shortened]... ates science.
I, perhaps, should have italicized the “some”—as in “some religionists”.[/b]
25 Oct 09
Originally posted by robbie carrobieAh! 🙂 You and I seem to have some past history in that regard, Robbie—probably my fault as many times as yours. (Now, don’t take that the wrong way!)
the tone was inherent in the wording, or at least i thought so!
I don’t define (or equate) religion as dogmatism. It is dogmatism (and any kind of idolatry—including “graven images of the mind”: i.e., what might be called “conceptual idolatry” ) that is my enemy. (And, for myself, any kind of self-deceit.) That means that I must always maintain self-vigilance and self-questioning. Whenever I argue, that is always in the background.
Which does not mean that I will not take a position and argue it…
25 Oct 09
Originally posted by robbie carrobieI take it this is the answer to my question from several hours back.
evolutionary hypothesis
Your terminology reveal that you have not even the foggiest possible understanding of the topics addressed here. Evolution is a theory because it has withstood thousands of tests over a century and a half. The word hypothesis in this case is falt wrong.
25 Oct 09
3 edits
Originally posted by Wulebgrspare me your vain arguments over semantics, any clown with an ounce of common sense would have worked out from the context what i was referring to. I refer to it as a hypothesis for the very reasons that visited has mentioned, in that by its very nature it is founded on a premise, and may or may not be subject to falsification and the scientific model. It is utterly dogmatic and condescending to think otherwise, for it may be a real theory to you, but that is all you can state with any ounce of certainty. When will you realise that other persons may evaluate things differently, even draw different conclusions from the very same data??? that may just be as equally as valid?
I take it this is the answer to my question from several hours back.
Your terminology reveal that you have not even the foggiest possible understanding of the topics addressed here. Evolution is a theory because it has withstood thousands of tests over a century and a half. The word hypothesis in this case is falt wrong.
25 Oct 09
Originally posted by vistesdyes this is the only thing that we can state with any certainty, that our evaluation, is valid, to us. I applaud you honesty and integrity for insightful revelation.
Ah! 🙂 You and I seem to have some past history in that regard, Robbie—probably my fault as many times as yours. (Now, don’t take that the wrong way!)
I don’t define (or equate) religion as dogmatism. It is dogmatism (and any kind of idolatry—including “graven images of the mind”: i.e., what might be called “conceptual idolatry” ) that is my ...[text shortened]... s always in the background.
Which does not mean that I will not take a position and argue it…
25 Oct 09
Originally posted by robbie carrobieMutual!
yes this is the only thing that we can state with any certainty, that our evaluation, is valid, to us. I applaud you honesty and integrity for insightful revelation.
Hey, man, I know we’ll swing our swords at each other again. Like the warriors of Valhalla, we can slay each other and then retire to the mead-hall for—a good Islay?
25 Oct 09
Originally posted by robbie carrobieYou seem to forget to answer my question. So I give you the question again:
twice!, this means that for a belief to be 'plausible', it must be founded on a substantiating reason. i have never trusted the B.B.C entirely, but for different reasons.
Originally posted by FabianFnas
Okay, you have read it twice. But you don't believe in the article in full. Have I understood you correctly?
Okay, you have read it twice. But you don't believe in the article in full. Have I understood you correctly?
25 Oct 09
Originally posted by menace71For a couple famous takes on this question, read The Time Machine and The War of the Worlds. Both writers' predictions are pretty grim.
If evolution is true than are we as a species still evolving? Are we going to eventually grow snouts or something? Over eons of time of course. I think we are devolving personally. LOL 🙂
Manny
25 Oct 09
Originally posted by vistesdyes we shall feast, across the rainbow bridge in Asgard, whence upon arrival we shall reach Valhalla, the hall of the slain to be attended upon by fair maidens, to feast, drink mead (single malts shall also abound), playchess till our hearts are content!
Mutual!
Hey, man, I know we’ll swing our swords at each other again. Like the warriors of Valhalla, we can slay each other and then retire to the mead-hall for—a good Islay?
25 Oct 09
Originally posted by menace71We are still evolving.
If evolution is true than are we as a species still evolving? Are we going to eventually grow snouts or something? Over eons of time of course. I think we are devolving personally. LOL 🙂
Manny
One noticeable trend throughout the last few centuries is that we are getting taller.