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

To: b_sharp
If you are stipulating that direct observation is dependent on current rather than past observations . . .

It is hardly a useless distinction or practice to lend more certitude to direct obervation of current events than to the results and interpretation thereof. Direct observation, testing in real time, and repeatability. These are what make for strong science. These are what evolutionism lacks.

310 posted on 08/15/2005 11:14:53 AM PDT by Fester Chugabrew
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 308 | View Replies ]


To: Fester Chugabrew
"It is hardly a useless distinction or practice to lend more certitude to direct obervation of current events than to the results and interpretation thereof. Direct observation, testing in real time, and repeatability. These are what make for strong science. These are what evolutionism lacks."

Genomic comparisons have indirect observation, testing in real time and repeatability. Direct observation of speciation, and the testing of the correlation between related species has been repeated.

Learn the science behind evolutionary biology before you claim it doesn't meet your science specs.

314 posted on 08/15/2005 11:44:44 AM PDT by b_sharp (Science adjusts theories to fit evidence, creationism distorts evidence to fit the Bible.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 310 | 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