Subject:
|
Re: Activist Judges (was Re: Woo-hoo! Dover gets it right!)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Thu, 22 Dec 2005 11:20:53 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1153 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John Neal wrote:
| |
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Dave Schuler wrote:
| |
Well I’ll be darned. This may be one of the few times that the stopped
clock of Dubya’s brain got it right
|
I bet that caused you physical pain to admit that, Dave! :-)
You know, I have no problem with evolution being taught as a theory (not
fact) in school, as long as the issue is handled honestly:
- Evolution is a theory, filled with questions and misunderstandings. It is our best idea about where life came from, but could be proved totally wrong tomorrow.
- The Big Bang and other theories of the origin of the universe must not be taught, as they are not scientific, being beyond the purview of science.
I actually love scientists who are brutally honest. It’s pretty humbling to
acknowledge that for all we know in this modern day and age, we still have no
idea about what constitutes 90% of the matter in our universe.
JOHN
|
John,
As a scientist I feel the need to be brutally honest here. You don’t appear to
understand the concept of science and theories.
Evolution is a theory (a proposed ‘model’ of ‘behaviour’ which has not been
disproved). So is all science. Science (note I say Science and not scientists)
deals in theories and hypotheses, not facts. Facts are for zealots (be they
religious or otherwise, some are even scientists). In fact, only maths has
theorems and even those rely on a presupposed set of rules (look up formal logic
if interested).
So as a scientist I have to ask “How valid is this theory?”. In the case of
lasers (for example) it is pretty darn valid in that it works almost all the
time it has been tried.
Evolution is pretty darn evident too although, given the time scales involved
and the quantity of direct evidence (there is a some but not much) it relies a
lot on indirect evidence.
The Big Bang and other origin-of-universe theories (yes they are theories since
they have not been disproved) are less evident but they are still considered to
be good models of the early universe. They are certainly not speculative enough
that they should be removed from school curricula as being unscientific.
There is one realm of study which is known to be highly speculative and
nonfactual (in the sense you meant it) and is taught in schools around the
world. It is religion. There is no evidence (in the scientific sense) for it at
all.
That’s it for now.
Tim
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
6 Messages in This Thread:
 
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
