BroJoek answered your question to me on “what makes an idea ‘scientific’?” on post 72.
I don’t know if you read that post. He said, “And indeed, it has nothing whatever to do with certitude, just the opposite.
Nothing in science is ontologically certain.
No theory (outside mathematics) is ever “proved”.
Every hypothesis is “confirmed” only by failures to disprove it.
Every theory is only accepted as “confirmed” until some future test succeeds in disproving it.”
In order for an idea to be a scientific hypothesis, it has to have a specific mechanism that can potentially be falsifiable by testing or forensic observation.
Examples of specific testable mechanisms:
-evolution by natural selection
-law of gravity
-the gas laws
-cell theory
Examples of untestable ideas
-climate chaos (no specific mechanism trotted out, vague pronouncements)
-precautionary principle (the threat is never specified because it is unknown)
-God (impossible to measure or define)
When Richard Dawkins says that “science” “disproves” God, he is talking nonsense. Just because the Cathedral gave him a science credential doesn’t mean everything he says is science. Many people have already pointed this out to you.
I don’t think you’re well equipped to confront the Eco-fascists or other toxic forces of the Cathedral. There’s a reason the public school system minimizes the teaching of the actual scientific method in favor of just having kids regurgitate “facts”. And unfortunately, many of the Christian homeschoolers aren’t doing it either. This of course results in a neutered opposition against the progressives in power in the Cathedral.
Nothing in science is ontologically certain.
No theory (outside mathematics) is ever “proved”.
Every hypothesis is “confirmed” only by failures to disprove it.
Every theory is only accepted as “confirmed” until some future test succeeds in disproving it.”
In order for an idea to be a scientific hypothesis, it has to have a specific mechanism that can potentially be falsifiable by testing or forensic observation.
Examples of specific testable mechanisms:
-evolution by natural selection
Spirited: In summary of the first paragraph: the underlying foundation of modern natural science and evolution is metaphysical nihilism which means that as evolution is always in motion there is nothing we can ever know with the slightest degree of certainty. C.S. Lewis understood this, thus he described natural science and evolution as magic science-—a very apt description.
As for the claim that evolution by natural selection is a testable mechanism: wrong.
Karl Popper (1902-1994) was a British philosopher and a professor at the London School of Economics. Because he is regarded as one of the greatest philosophers of science of the 20th century, what Popper had to say about Darwinism is of importance to all truth-seekers.
Though Popper esteemed evolutionary theory and natural selection, he also honestly admitted that Darwinism is not a testable scientific theory but rather a metaphysical research program. By this he means that not only is Darwinism of the spiritual dimension, but so are its’ two most important foundations, classical empiricism and the observationalist philosophy of science that grew out of it.
Empiricism is a theory of knowledge that immediately contradicts itself by asserting that human knowledge comes only or primarily via sensory experience rather than the mind (soul/spirit/ghost in the machine)while observationalism asserts that human knowledge and theories must be based on empirical observations....instead of the mind. Due to this major disconnect from reality, Popper argued strongly against empiricism and observationalism, saying that scientific theories and human knowledge generally, is conjectural or hypothetical and is generated by the creative imagination (mind).
In Noah Webster’s American Dictionary of the English Language, 1828, soul and imagination are respectively defined as:
1. Soul: “The spiritual, rational and immortal substance in man, which distinguishes him from brutes; that part of man which enables him to think and reason.”
2. Imagination: “...the power or faculty of the mind by which it conceives and forms ideas of things communicated to it by the senses....The business of conception (and the) power of modifying our conceptions, by combining the parts of different ones so as to form new wholes of our own creation...(imagination) selects the parts of different conceptions, or objects of memory, to form a whole more pleasing, more terrible, or more awful, than has ever been presented in the ordinary course of nature.”
In conclusion, all three theories originated in the mind (spirit). As mind is a power of soul, then Darwinism, empiricism, and observationalism are spiritual. In short, all three theories are frauds. They claim to be what they are not in order to obtain an advantage over the Genesis account of creation by imposition of immoral means.