Time to Evolve from Evolution (Saturbray)

www.brayincandy.com ^ | 2/2/13 | bray

[Zeneta]

Yes, but the bigger picture, is when later researchers use the admittedly speculative conclusions to establish new conclusions.

This is how you get “assumed evolution” used to “prove” evolution. In addition, it also lends itself to serial revisions by scientist that are attempting to make a name for themselves.

Now, the evolutionist will tell you that “this is how science works”. All the while they fail to realize that the theory is a “self supporting” construct.

[tacticalogic]

Theology is a science

So you say, instead of explaining why you don't take it over the the Religion forum.

[tacticalogic]

No

That's what I thought.

[stormer]

This is not science? No - this is exactly science. There are no guarantees, there are no proofs, there are no absolutes. The whole concept of the scientific method is that there are qualifiers. All crows are black - no?

[OneWingedShark]

>>Theology is a science
>
>So you say, instead of explaining why you don't take it over the the Religion forum.

Because theology is not religion.

Religion

Theology

a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, especially when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs. a specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons or sects: the Christian religion; the Buddhist religion. the body of persons adhering to a particular set of beliefs and practices: a world council of religions. the life or state of a monk, nun, etc.: to enter religion. the practice of religious beliefs; ritual observance of faith.

the field of study and analysis that treats of God and of God's attributes and relations to the universe; study of divine things or religious truth; divinity. a particular form, system, branch, or course of this study. "...the systematic and rational study of concepts of God and its influences and of the nature of religious truths..." (from wikipedia)

The more interesting question is why you seem hung up on the idea of theology as a science; I don't see you railing against philosophy. (What about the really soft sciences, like sociology?)

[OneWingedShark]

This is not science? No - this is exactly science. There are no guarantees, there are no proofs, there are no absolutes.

Disproof by counterexample: mathematics.

[stormer]

I’m glad to see you confess your ignorance. Where does your confusion lie?

[Zeneta]

......This is not science? No - this is exactly science. There are no guarantees, there are no proofs, there are no absolutes. The whole concept of the scientific method is that there are qualifiers...........

The science of perpetual uncertainty.

In the mean time, accept it.

[Zeneta]

Your failure to read and comprehend is in full display.

once again.

[tacticalogic]

The semantic quagmire that is conversation with you is not producing anything of value to offset considerable effort required.

You do your cause no service.

[stormer]

You seem to want some kind of linearity, and I'm afraid the development of species is somewhat more complicated - convergence and divergence, the eradication of populations, and the isolation of populations confound history. Of course Darwin recognized problems with his theory - if you could point me to specifics, perhaps I could address them.

[stormer]

Mathematics is not a science.

[Zeneta]

.......Mathematics is not a science..........

You are a child.

You call yourself a materialist.

You call yourself, to a certain extent, a scientist.

But the very capacities you use for discovery, are somehow unscientific.

[OneWingedShark]

Back your assertion.

[bray]

Maybe evolution should go over to the religion forum?

[Zeneta]

Maybe evolution should go over to the religion forum?

You started this.............. WTF ?

[stormer]

I cannot speak to your scientific education, only my own. I can say, that within the realm of science, I am far from a child. That does not mean that I do not have a lot to learn or that my education is complete, but it does mean that when discussing the means, goals, and methods of science, I actually do speak with some authority. I’m not a mechanic, so I won’t tell you how to fix your car, but I do know science - take it or leave it.

[OneWingedShark]

The semantic quagmire that is conversation with you is not producing anything of value to offset considerable effort required.

I'm sorry you feel that way -- from where I sit it seems you're the one who is demanding explanation only to fail to engage in any intercourse by simply dismissing any reasoning I make as "semantics".

You do your cause no service.

LOL -- Now that is funny... not because of you; but because it seems that can be said of anything I care about.

[stormer]

It's not my assertion - math simply does not meet the criteria of science. It had no predictive value and is not falsifiable.

[Zeneta]

No, you can’t speak to my education, but I can speak to yours.

I know you use mental capacities, math and logic, that can’t be defined by your standards of materialism.

This is called using the logical conclusions of evolution, specifically, presupposition and free will.

Am I predisposed to God? It’s in my genes?

Are you predisposed to evolution?