Posted on 04/16/2009 8:59:36 AM PDT by GodGunsGuts
“If Popper had anything more to say on the subject that you wanted people to know, someone would have have posted it by now.”Hey, you asked a question and I answered it.
If you don't have better answers, don't bitch about everyone else's ;-).
“If you don't have better answers, don't bitch about everyone else's ;-).”You asked me to describe a better methodology and my answer was that you should read some of Popper's works.
Indeed.
That is not a desciption of a better methodology, unless you are proposing that all the answers can be found in Popper's works, and simply reading them can provide a reliable relpacement for experimentation and observation.
Nobody else answered your question on this thread.
Neither did you.
Your response to my answer was to whine and complain.
I pointed out that you didn't describe a better methodology.
“That is not a desciption of a better methodology,” [excerpt]If you really want a better methodology, I gave you a starting point.
“unless you are proposing that all the answers can be found in Popper's works,” [excerpt, bold emphasis mine]All?
“and simply reading them can provide a reliable relpacement for experimentation and observation.” [excerpt]Who is wanting to replace experimentation and observation? (my oh my, I've spied me a strawman!)
You asked for a description and I told you where you could find one.Nobody else answered your question on this thread.“Neither did you.” [excerpt]
The fact is, your favorite methodology is intrinsically flawed.Your response to my answer was to whine and complain.“I pointed out that you didn't describe a better methodology.” [excerpt]
No you don't. But until you do you are simply complaining about it. You don't like the methodology they're using, but you can't say what methodology would be better.
Ah, but I have!I do not have to describe a better alternative in order to point out those flaws.“No you don't. But until you do you are simply complaining about it.” [excerpt]
“You don't like the methodology they're using,” [excerpt]And you don't like science. (Hey, if you can read my mind, I can read yours!)
“but you can't say what methodology would be better.” [excerpt]Well, the truth is, there is no better methodology for promoting Evolution.
Exactly who has claimed that is something it is not, what exactly have they said about it that is inaccurate?
BTW, you never did answer the question of How did the laws of physics came into existence via naturalistic processes?
No, I didn't. Do you still beat your wife?
“Exactly who has claimed that is something it is not, what exactly have they said about it that is inaccurate?” [excerpt]Various Evo's with regards to the objectivity of Methodological Naturalism as a scientific methodology.
Are you implying that the laws of physics came into existence by a supernatural means?BTW, you never did answer the question of How did the laws of physics came into existence via naturalistic processes?“No, I didn't. Do you still beat your wife?” [excerpt]
That's apparently supposed to be the conclusion.
Having cut it's throat, do you have a proposal for a replacement for science to proceed with, or is the objective to insure that it simply does not proceed at all?
There’s really no other scientific theory to teach. The alternatives pretty much boil down to either “God did it” or “somebody did something sometime, but we have no idea who or what or when.” I personally wouldn’t mind if a teacher said basically that when teaching evolution—”Some people object to this theory because they believe it threatens their belief in God, and others object because they don’t think it explains everything, but they don’t really have another explanation to offer”—but I don’t think that’s what creationists will settle for.
This shows your bias like nothing I could ever EVER write...and how very magnanimous of you!
Sheesh! Imagine this...you don’t think the majority of Americans will settle for your plainly liberal interpretations!
I have a better idea...how about a more truthful presentation like responsible parents putting stickers on science text books in Georgia reminding students evolution is theory, not fact; but naturally they were sued...
and imagine, there was no reference to other theories, God or otherwise; because ANY examination of evolution is always attakced by a liberal mountain or army ants who have too much at stake by now...and the TRUTH is no other scientific theory is hijacked like this by dishonest liberals so painfully insecure with God?
Or how about evolution can’t be honestly examined because some people will be too offended, ALWAYS without exception see any question as religious, and see it as a threat to their DIS-belief in God?
Well, of course that wouldn’t work for you!
That’s just it though, this is what Rush Limbaugh talks about when he says there just IS no compromise with liberals!
And I DO thank you for your honesty exhibiting this very truth Rush talks about!
This rings far more truthful to most Americans just the same though.
Most middle-aged and older Americans (that would be the unwashed masses who weren’t steeped in the indoctrination) wonder why God was such a threat to science in the first place to people like you. We wonder when we became Cuba where no one could question the scientists, the educators...where any question was seen as a right wing religious attack when a kid asked about God’s link to creation in science class...
Science and everything else actually, worked just fine in this country and we really aren’t interested in a Cuban model here.
The fact is liberals can never tolerate any honest examination of evolution because of their myriad insecurities with God and at this point the only people who can’t see it are the one’s with the most abject over-the-hill-too-far-gone-to-return-to-reason insecurities.
Time and again on these threads I’ve seen even people with no stake in this argument, who could care less about God one way or another, see the godless liberals with all their insecurities bend over backwards to mis-represent, project and any dozens of other tactics.
The information can’t be stopped at this point though and the truth will always set you free and therein lies the rub!
Thankfully enough of us care and understand abandoning the public arena, including the schools, isn’t the answer, and we’ll continue to remind even adults that evolution is theory and not fact.
do not understand why honest evolutionists, which I assume most of my fellow FReepers are, get upset when we want the problems, contradictions and unanswered questions of evolutionary theory admitted and explored. To present it as infallible, especially given the tremendous changes that have occurred within it during its short tenure as “the only doctrine of our creation,” is unscientific in itself.
To admit there are weaknesses, flaws, or inconsistencies in the theory of evolution does not make you a creationist. It just makes you an honest person.
The reason you don’t understand it, is because like it or not almost all of them are blatantly dishonest. Some are worse than others, some are just blind to their bias and some have been indoctrinated by the cult.
There’s really no other scientific theory to teach. The alternatives pretty much boil down to either “God did it” or “somebody did something sometime, but we have no idea who or what or when.” I personally wouldn’t mind if a teacher said basically that when teaching evolution—”Some people object to this theory because they believe it threatens their belief in God, and others object because they don’t think it explains everything, but they don’t really have another explanation to offer”—but I don’t think that’s what creationists will settle for.
This shows your bias like nothing I could ever EVER write...and how very magnanimous of you!
Sheesh! Imagine this...you don’t think the majority of Americans will settle for your plainly liberal interpretations!
I have a better idea...how about a more truthful presentation like responsible parents putting stickers on science text books in Georgia reminding students evolution is theory, not fact; but naturally they were sued...
and imagine, there was no reference to other theories, God or otherwise; because ANY examination of evolution is always attakced by a liberal mountain or army ants who have too much at stake by now...and the TRUTH is no other scientific theory is hijacked like this by dishonest liberals so painfully insecure with God?
Or how about evolution can’t be honestly examined because some people will be too offended, ALWAYS without exception see any question as religious, and see it as a threat to their DIS-belief in God?
Well, of course that wouldn’t work for you!
That’s just it though, this is what Rush Limbaugh talks about when he says there just IS no compromise with liberals!
And I DO thank you for your honesty exhibiting this very truth Rush talks about!
This rings far more truthful to most Americans just the same though.
Most middle-aged and older Americans (that would be the unwashed masses who weren’t steeped in the indoctrination) wonder why God was such a threat to science in the first place to people like you. We wonder when we became Cuba where no one could question the scientists, the educators...where any question was seen as a right wing religious attack when a kid asked about God’s link to creation in science class...
Science and everything else actually, worked just fine in this country and we really aren’t interested in a Cuban model here.
The fact is liberals can never tolerate any honest examination of evolution because of their myriad insecurities with God and at this point the only people who can’t see it are the one’s with the most abject over-the-hill-too-far-gone-to-return-to-reason insecurities.
Time and again on these threads I’ve seen even people with no stake in this argument, who could care less about God one way or another, see the godless liberals with all their insecurities bend over backwards to mis-represent, project and any dozens of other tactics.
The information can’t be stopped at this point though and the truth will always set you free and therein lies the rub!
Thankfully enough of us care and understand abandoning the public arena, including the schools, isn’t the answer, and we’ll continue to remind even adults that evolution is theory and not fact.
Nobody else answered your question on this thread.
Neither did you.
Because no one can! If God Himself came down to earth to answer, tacticalogic would simply change the subject, ramble into circular arguments with himself and on and on and on...ad infinatum.
I suspect you’ll find it’s best to avoid going down dark dead end roads with no place to turn around fichori...forewarned and all that...;)
Various Evo's with regards to the objectivity of Methodological Naturalism as a scientific methodology.
Okay. Some indeterminate number of unnamed individuals made some unspecified statements.
Exactly who said it and what it was they said remains a mystery.
Uh-huh....so how about the majority of millions of American parents....where do they fit in?
BTW...the very same thing IS being done by the NEA, public screwel adminstrators and various other dishonest liberals hijacking education and everything else they touch.
Be careful - Physics shows the Earth to be billions of years old - supporting such things may cause others to turn on you.
Now you’re under the impression someone, anyone has appointed you the spokesman for physics?
No, you see physics wasn’t what had people believing in a flat earth either...the knowledge isn’t etched in stone.
Maybe in Cuba it is, but not here, not yet.
(BTW, do you get that too many people are onto you?)
Good thing science doesn’t rely on polls, otherwise doctors would still believe that sickness was caused by newts living in one’s stomach or imbalance in essential vapors.
Or we people all CAME from newts which CAME from dirt which CAME from vapors...just because?
Questioning of any other scientific theory does not raise the objections or accusations that questioning the ToE does. All of which goes to show that it’s not really about the science in the first place, but that it’s about the difference in ideologies.
Yup...only in the liberal world can you think evolution is the conservative position.
ONLY in the liberal mind can you think that Christianity is what harms modern scientific understanding, as opposed to helping it flourish in this country.
And only in a liberal mind will you find this incessant idiocy about all the religions must be “taught” somehow “equally” or none at all, WHILE demanding like a child that the ONLY scientific truth acceptable for all is that from *GASP* like-minded liberals...
if a scientist with credentials at MIT dares question King Darwin...he gets smeared and so on...ad infinatum.
Religion can be a democratic thing (in order to obscure the truth and water it down so it can eventually be erased all together),
while science must be a dictatorship (once again in order to obscure the truth), actually having zero to do with science.
What kills me is they actually don’t think anyone’s on to them!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.