Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: eleni121
"Enjoy."

I looked at the Wik. links. Their use of the word theory for instance, does not apply to spontaneous generation/abiogenesis whatsoever. There was never anything more than a hypothesis. The total, is a list of disproven hypothesis and very weak theory.

What I do see in that collection is poor reasoning. I see the same poor reasoning in the behind the conclusions of the Council of Orange. The difference between science councils and theological councils, is that weak reasoning gets attacked and overturned in science councils. In theological councils, weak reasoning and falsehood is stamped as dogma, doctrine and unfathomable mystery. Anyone that questions it is branded a heretic and banished. That's real in the theological world. The scientific world doesn't do that.

1,648 posted on 08/04/2005 1:15:07 PM PDT by spunkets
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1628 | View Replies ]


To: spunkets

That's the problem with evolutionists - you really do sound cultish. The 'My way or the highway" approach to science will get you nothing but trouble...and question and argument. Evolutionists can't seem to handle argument and quesitioning - very absolute.

I concur with Popper (from the same link):

"Karl Popper suggested that all scientific theories should be falsifiable otherwise they could not be tested by experiment. Anything that cannot be shown by experiment to be false would therefore be an axiom and have an absolute status, beyond any confirmation or refutation."


1,667 posted on 08/04/2005 2:15:10 PM PDT by eleni121 ('Thou hast conquered, O Galilean!' (Julian the Apostate))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1648 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson