Ben Stein Exposes Richard Dawkins (Dawkins admits possibility of ID, Just Not God).

Townhall ^ | April 21, 2008 | Dinesh D'Souza

[tacticalogic]

Bull, science begins with observation(research), followed by hypothesis then theory.

You develop a hypothesis, and from that develop a theory and then you do research to test whether the theory is valid. You can have a hypothesis or theory without ever having observed what you're hypothesizing/theorizing about. You may have to modify the theory, or discard it altogether depending on what the research shows. Just having a theory isn't the end of the process by a long shot.

[AndrewC]

Would you mind explaining how you do research on a theory that there is no way to ever determine whether it is correct or not? If it’s testable, what is the test?

Here is a good introduction into the scientific method.

Introduction to the Scientific Method

Note step 4 in the following excerpt.

I. The scientific method has four steps

1. Observation and description of a phenomenon or group of phenomena.

2. Formulation of an hypothesis to explain the phenomena. In physics, the hypothesis often takes the form of a causal mechanism or a mathematical relation.

3. Use of the hypothesis to predict the existence of other phenomena, or to predict quantitatively the results of new observations.

4. Performance of experimental tests of the predictions by several independent experimenters and properly performed experiments.

Again, I mention that the hypothesis step or even the description of a phenomenon step is taboo according to the "dogma".

[tacticalogic]

Again, I mention that the hypothesis step or even the description of a phenomenon step is taboo according to the "dogma".

How is the "dogma" preventing it. The fact that we're having this conversation about it means it's already happened.

[AndrewC]

How is the "dogma" preventing it. The fact that we're having this conversation about it means it's already happened.

Go see the movie, "Expelled".

This conversation is not science, it is argumentation, a philosophical pursuit.

[tacticalogic]

This conversation is not science, it is argumentation, a philosophical pursuit.

So is ID if it can't get past Step 2 of the presented Scientific Method. I have yet to see any explaination of how to go abount doing that.

[tacticalogic]

Somewhere along the way it seems as if someone got, and managed to propagate the idea that a hypothesis is not really a hypothesis until a university is paying someone for it.

[AndrewC]

So is ID if it can't get past Step 2 of the presented Scientific Method. I have yet to see any explaination of how to go abount doing that.

Again, this is not science. This is argumentation. ID states that it is science, but it is not allowed into the arena so it is not that it can't get past step two. It is not allowed to get past step two. See the movie, that is the thrust of the movie.

ID can make predictions which Neo-Darwinism fails. "Junk" DNA is an example of Neo-Darwinism failure to explain, especially highly conserved "junk" DNA. ID would predict uses for apparent "junk". Something like reusable code, scratchpad memory, double indirect addressing, and codons with multiple meanings(context) for example.

[AndrewC]

Somewhere along the way it seems as if someone got, and managed to propagate the idea that a hypothesis is not really a hypothesis until a university is paying someone for it.

Since when does a university "pay" for anything? Last time I looked, universities seek money. And the people who were victimized for mentioning ID, did not ask for payment for hypotheses.

[airborne]

God created everything.

If ET exists, then He created them too.

We don’t know everything; in fact, we don’t know anything.

Only God does.

Just my humble opinion. Feel free to differ. 8^)

[tacticalogic]

I’ve never seen a university professor standing by the road with a sign that says “Will teach quantum mechanics for food.”

[tacticalogic]

Again, this is not science. This is argumentation. ID states that it is science, but it is not allowed into the arena so it is not that it can't get past step two. It is not allowed to get past step two. See the movie, that is the thrust of the movie.

ID stating that it is science doesn't make it so. No one can stop a person who believes in the theory from pursuing it by their own means, and no one is preventing them from explaining how to proceed past step two. You can do it right here, and right now if you want and nobody is going to stop you.

[AndrewC]

ID stating that it is science doesn't make it so.

True, but excluding even the most remote mention of it from the centers of learning is what "Expelled" is about. And this exclusion is what prevents it from proceeding on in a fair manner. This exclusion is so complete that the mere mention of the incomplete nature of Neo-Darwinism on a label in high school text books is challenged in court and not in the lab.

[tacticalogic]

This exclusion is so complete that the mere mention of the incomplete nature of Neo-Darwinism on a label in high school text books is challenged in court and not in the lab.

That's the lawyers doing that. Don't take it out on the lab.

[AndrewC]

I’ve never seen a university professor standing by the road with a sign that says “Will teach quantum mechanics for food.”

Well I have seen plenty of requests from universities for money, essentially the same concept.

[AndrewC]

That's the lawyers doing that.

Lawyers get paid by someone.

[tacticalogic]

And you’r still welcome to lay out how to proceed with steps 3 and 4 right now if you wish.

[tacticalogic]

Lawyers get paid by someone.

I'll bet it's not the lab.

[tacticalogic]

Well I have seen plenty of requests from universities for money, essentially the same concept.

So what does the university have that they need before they can proceed?

[AndrewC]

And you’r still welcome to lay out how to proceed with steps 3 and 4 right now if you wish.

I may be welcome to do so, but until a fair access to resources is allowed any such "lay out" is fruitless, and not a point of this thread as it was not a point of the film.

Again, I reiterate, what we are doing here is argumentation, not science.

[AndrewC]

I'll bet it's not the lab.

I suggest you go to Las Vegas or Atlantic City.