A New Day, Some New Science

Family Issues In Policy and Culture. ^ | August 15, 2003 | Pete Winn

[f.Christian]

Too dumb - AFRAID to explain - explore your own bias - animosity ...

just this recluse drama I was reading about in japan where young men (( virtual ignore - withdrawl )) refuse to compete in the normal world ...

paranoia (( anxiety // guilt )) --- anger at authority -- growing up - REALITY - ...

competition of altervnative ideas -- beliefs --- too scary ?

Find a friend -- HIGHER purpose ... something to live - break out of your shell - prison FOR !

Self centeredness ... unexamined --- this is soul - mind death --- genocide !

Evolution is a hold on maturity ... unbridled infantilism --- foolishness !

[rmmcdaniell]

just this recluse drama I was reading about in japan where young men (( virtual ignore - withdrawl )) refuse to compete in the normal world

Talk about a refusal to compete. You can't compete in this debate so you resort to this crypto-speak.

[Admin Moderator]

No personal attacks please.

[Blzbba]

"Evolution is far better supported than Gravity.
Both are Hypotheses."


Actually, gravity is a Law.

[f.Christian]

Nothing personal ... I should address my rant to ---

whosoever it may concern (( no one )) !

It's healthy to vent !

I do have family -- grandchildren and concerns ... about the drift - plunge --- the world has taken !

[Blzbba]

"Well, frankly, you aren't using the terms correctly, either. As scientists use the terms, a "hypothesis" is a statement about reality, a "theory" is a conceptual model, and a "law" is an empirical relationship. None of the terms make any reference to whether the proposition is proven or not (or even true or false)."


Well, franky, neither are you.

A theory is an idea that has been proven experimentally, but not completely beyond the shadow of a doubt. It's the "best accepted" idea explaining a particular phenomenon. Or as Webster's puts it:

Theory:

A set of statements or principles devised to explain a group of facts or phenomena, especially one that has been repeatedly tested or is widely accepted and can be used to make predictions about natural phenomena.



Whereas a Hypothesis is an idea that hasn't yet been proven incorrect or correct concerning said phenomenon. Again, Mr. Webster provides a better definiton:

Hypothesis:

1. A tentative explanation for an observation, phenomenon, or scientific problem that can be tested by further investigation.
2. Something taken to be true for the purpose of argument or investigation; an assumption.


Your statement that a theory can be disproven and still be a theory is incorrect as well.

If you are going to attempt to correct me, do a better job than you did here. My original assertation that ID is merely a hypothesis still stands.

[Servant of the Nine]

Actually, gravity is a Law.

Really?

Which theory is actually the law? Quantum Gravity? Relativistic Gravity? Newtonian Gravity?

They give different answers to any question you know.

So9

[rmmcdaniell]

Nothing personal ... I should address my rant to ---

whosoever it may concern (( no one )) !

It's healthy to vent !

It is also healthy to play games, however sometimes those games can cause harm to others. For instance, if one was to play the part of a Christian on a conservative forum speaking in a ridiculous, childish fashion, it could hurt the credibility of that movement in the eyes of the public.

[f.Christian]

Raise the America --- the Republic and the mentality of those who run and inhabit it !

[rmmcdaniell]

Raise the America --- the Republic and the mentality of those who run and inhabit it !

Yes, Lets all raise our mentality by trying harder to make ourselves better understood by others, for the Republic's sake.

[ThinkPlease]

ID has not been PROVEN, therefore it is a HYPOTHESIS, not a THEORY.

It's even worse that that. ID doesn't even have a testable scientific hypothesis. I've had a standing offer for someone to point me out to a page where a scientst or group of scientists promoting this growing phoenomenon called Intelligent Design has actually built a testable scientific hypothesis of it. No one has ever done so. I've scoured the pages of ISCID, and the Discovery Institute, and yet nothing has ever come about. Can you help me with this conundrum? How can a scientific movement be scientific and not have a scientifically testable hypothesis?

[f.Christian]

If I caught your attention and made you think - laugh - cry ...

I am doing my job ---

it worked for stolarsystem yesterday -- a little !

[Vindiciae Contra TyrannoSCOTUS]

A Theory of Creation (T. Wallace)-answering the vacuous (but popular, at TalkOrigins) claim that no empirically relevant creationary theory exists.

419 Web-Based Articles-some of the best material supportive of the biblical creationary model, carefully selected and compiled by Ashby Camp.

[MattAMiller]

There's really nothing new about saying "Gee there sure is a lot of complex stuff, God must have done it." Evolution is not going to go away because you find more complexity, because evoluton explains why biological complexity exists.

[RadioAstronomer]

Actually, gravity is a Law.

see post #36. Newton's Law of Universal Gravitation had some problems that were later were explained by general relativity.

From here:

http://www.nps.gov/flfo/High%20School%20Curiculum/web%20graphics/Intro.htm

"As with all scientific knowledge, a theory can be refined or even replaced by analternative theory in light of new and compelling evidence.

The geocentric theory that the sun revolves around the earth was replaced by the heliocentric theory of the earth's rotation on its axis and revolution around the sun. However, ideas are not referred to as "theories" in science unless they are supported by bodies of evidence that make their subsequent abandonment very unlikely. When a theory is supported by as much evidence as evolution, it is held with a very high degree of confidence.

In science, the word "hypothesis" conveys the tentativeness inherent in the common use of the word "theory.' A hypothesis is a testable statement about the natural world. Through experiment and observation, hypotheses can be supported or rejected. At the earliest level of understanding, hypotheses can be used to construct more complex inferences and explanations. Like "theory," the word "fact" has a different meaning in science than it does in common usage. A scientific fact is an observation that has been confirmed over and over. However, observations are gathered by our senses, which can never be trusted entirely. Observations also can change with better technologies or with better ways of looking at data. For example, it was held as a scientific fact for many years that human cells have 24 pairs of chromosomes, until improved techniques of microscopy revealed that they actually have 23. Ironically, facts in science often are more susceptible to change than theories, which is one reasonwhy the word "fact" is not much used in science.

Finally, "laws" in science are typically descriptions of how the physical world behaves under certain circumstances. For example, the laws of motion describe how objects move when subjected to certain forces. These laws can be very useful in supporting hypotheses and theories, but like all elements of science they can be altered with new information and observations."

[RadioAstronomer]

It's even worse that that. ID doesn't even have a testable scientific hypothesis

I Completely agree.

[rmmcdaniell]

If I caught your attention and made you think - laugh - cry ...

I am doing my job ---

To what grand purpose does your posts serve? The only thing I see it doing is making the beliefs you seem to hold look foolish.

[f.Christian]

Joseph Farah simply and concisely describes the social, political, and moral troubles besetting America and prescribes the solutions, empowering Americans to address problems within their grasp. The author provides readers an opportunity to better understand the root causes of America's political and social decline. He also tells how the founders' vision for America is still appropriate for today's postmodern world. Farah encourages Americans to rededicate themselves to constitutional government and moral principles on which this country was founded.

" Taking America Back" is about more than just how to think about the problems overwhelming our country; it is also about what to do to make them right.

gtta go !

[StatesEnemy]

How many drinks... yellow is a pretty color... have you had?

[f.Christian]

I exceeded my limit a long time ago ... just natural happiness now --- love // aloha !