Creationists/ IDers:

[Jose Fly]

I honestly can't believe you guys are still trying to explain basic science to Man of Faith. All that time, all that effort, and he still thinks "If you don't see it happen, it ain't science"?

I have a hard time thinking of a bigger waste of time. Let it go...he's completely and totally unreachable. Sure you can point out the childishly ignorant nature of his posts for the phantom "lurkers", but to try and actually educate the guy? Seriously?

 

[tumbleweed41]

I have a hard time thinking of a bigger waste of time. Let it go...he's completely and totally unreachable. Sure you can point out the childishly ignorant nature of his posts for the phantom "lurkers", but to try and actually educate the guy? Seriously?

Preventing the spread of ignorance, one post at a time

(I agree, I doubt MOF will ever change his dogmatic stance on science)

 

[Jose Fly]

Preventing the spread of ignorance, one post at a time

(I agree, I doubt MOF will ever change his dogmatic stance on science)

I suppose, but I don't see the point in attempting actual dialog with MoF, let alone a teaching session. I think explaining neutral genetic drift to my border collie would be more productive. :drool:

 

[RomCat]

Stephen Hawkings sadly concluded
that we will never be able to get closer
to the beginning of the Universe than
a few billionths of a second.
The Pope answered: That is because
it is the moment God created the Universe.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

If a hypothesis is to be part of the scientific method it has to be made on something that is observed.

No, actually.

The scientific method doesn't place any requirements on hypotheses except that they be testable. Come up with any crazy hypothesis you want, and as long as you can figure out a valid way to determine whether it's true or false, and it fits within science.

 

[nonbeliever_92]

Stephen Hawkings sadly concluded
that we will never be able to get closer
to the beginning of the Universe than
a few billionths of a second.
The Pope answered: That is because
it is the moment God created the Universe.

So? asdasd

 

[Big_TJ]

No, actually.

The scientific method doesn't place any requirements on hypotheses except that they be testable. Come up with any crazy hypothesis you want, and as long as you can figure out a valid way to determine whether it's true or false, and it fits within science.

If MOF does not understand the basics of a what is considered a scientific method (something that is practically known from high school), how in the world do we expect him to understand the basics of evolution (something I'm sure he was never properly thought before he came to this forum?)

 

[Autodidact]

To me science is the study of the natural world and what is observed. The natural world and what is observed could have been created by an intelligent being, nobody can verify that or prove it wrong. How the natural would and what is observed got here should be reserved for the philosophy class. Science cannot observe the big bang, the beginning of life, and evolution via common descent so it is philosophy and should be in the philosophy class along with creation.

Also heliocentrism, atoms, gravity, electricity...all philosophy, and none have any place in the science curriculum.

Here's a thought, Man of Faith, maybe scientists should decide what is science and what should be taught as part of the science curriculum. What do you think of that idea?