So, we should only teach 'necessary' science in schools, plus religion. Not with my tax dollars. Churches and governments have abysmal records on science. Inference is a human skill, so God must have put it there. Let's use it.
Exactly, evolution is a theory it is not a fact. But it seems you and established science treat it as a fact, and want to brainwash people (mandatory teach it in schools as a fact). My point it is that evolution is different than observable science. It is just a theory. Based on one very big assumption.
Gravity is also a theory, not a fact. Both theories have predictive value and are generally accepted. Intelligent design may be true, but it is not a theory or a fact. It is a religious belief. It is not observable or testable, and has no predictive value. Well, you might say it predicts a second coming, but the charade is that it is not specific about the designer, so it really does not predict based on the bible.
Gravity is a fact. It is observable, verifiable and repeatable. Gravity is a scientific fact, invention and engineering are based on it. What causes gravity is a theory. Really it is not very well understood what causes gravity. It properties are well know and documented. See that is the difference. Something that we can measure is Physical Science. Something that is conjecture is Theoretical Science. They are really separate. One is fact one is not. My point is that if we eliminated all of the Theoretical Science it would not change anything in engineering and invention. That is the difference. Yet the scientific community considers their theories and don't even want to consider any thing else.
You and I don't get to decide what is observable, verifiable, or repeatable. The scientific method does that. Laymen, governments, and clergy should not apply to be czar of what is 'true' science and what is 'only' theory. Rather, we develop an understanding of the world, and that understanding evolves based on evidence. I don't want to define science as restricted to your idea of physical observations. That is like saying we only need machinists, not engineers. Knowledge of the underlying theoretical foundations of our understanding is critical to advancement of things even within the narrow physical sciences you accept.
Evolution is how superbugs (bacteria) happen, and superweeds, too. Many animals have shown evolution, and plants, and it is quite observable. Look up archeopteryx. Look up megafauna. Look up Neanderthal and Denisovan DNA.
Look up Mendel. Today we would agree his work is observable, yet he was jailed. The Earth is round in spite of once widely held religious doctrine still adhered to by a few. Keep science free!
I have news for you. The scientific community is one of the most closed minded and unfree there is. You can not be a "scientist" if you do not adhere to their "beliefs" There is just as much "faith" in Theoretical Science as there is in religion. Maybe more.
As a glorified machinist , I would say that engineers can be useful. As long as they LISTEN when I correct their theoretical crap. And accept it when I modify their solid models.
Hypothesis is a Testable EXPLANATION of a "something" usually a set of observations The TESTABLE was put in the definition to exclude religious explanations. A THEORY is a HYPOTHESIS that has repeatedly SUPPORTED by many many experiments. SCIENTIFIC LAWS- are more or less descriptions-usually expressed as formulas- of various natural phenomena-4 fundamental forces for example Gravity electromagnetism strong nuclear force (maybe weak force-but that MIGHT-be electromagnetism) Notice there is NO EXPLANATIONS offered in laws No WHY of law of gravity-just how much how hard Laws just ARE the way things are-no explanation-they allow very accurate predictions- Theories are considered "facts" until they have been disproved-they most certainly are NOT disproved because of a single study-they are frequently modified adjusted as evidence warrants Heck same story with laws- Newton's gravity "modified" because of Einstein-certainly doesn't mean Newton got it wrong-his law allowed and allows-very accurate predictions Theories also allow accurate predictions-bacteria exposed to antibiotics -develop resistant bacteria Darwin offered NO mechanism for How FAVORABLE QUALITIES actually appeared -he was just offering an explanation for the WHY of biodiversity-why so many different organisms- natural selection-meaning if you had favorable qualities-favorable in respect to fitting environment-your progeny were more likely to survive to produce MORE progeny Darwin offered NO explanation of HOW these "favorable" qualities came into being-just how they would favor the progeny that had them We now know the HOW of EVOLUTION= CHEMISTRY+ TIME+ PROBABILITY Religion and Science- two different things- one is a way of studying the universe-a system l One is faith
Exactly, but by dictating what "therories" are to be taught in school as fact, you (or rather accepted establishment) are dictating what is to be talk to me and others. Hence lack of freedom of thought. It would be easy to say these are just theories, but we all know that they are considered unquestionable fact and to think otherwise you are looked down upon. Don't you agree with that.
Exactly, Hypothesis and Theories are not facts. They may or may not be true. Why do we treat them as fact. How do you know small single celled organisms INSIDE our cells were actually separate organisms How do you know that. You don't because you didn't observe it. That's my point. You "believe" it. You have "faith" that they were. WOW, almost sounds like religion.
No scientist I know confuses fact with theory. They accept certain theories as the best available explanation of the world, but always open to new evidence. A cohesive theoretical framework is a good thing. It is not a fact. Not all good things are facts.
It has been a few years for me, but I would challenge you to go to a paleontology class and watch as the professor asks "Does anyone here believe in creation and not evolution." The one person that answered yes was told there is no place for you in this class or in geology. That is an example of how open the scientific community is. It wasn't me. I was not as bold as I am now or I might have spoken up. I ended up with a degree in geology. That was now several decades ago.
That is too bad. There are bone heads in most any group, I suppose. Certainly in both sides of this debate.
We actually do treat them as " working facts" in the sense that they allow useful predictions. We KNOW they were once different organisms because they have COMPLETELY different DNA-and have the remnants of a cell membrane. Now KNOW doesn't mean we saw it-I can't see X-rays. Know means it is a the working explanation. Theories are modified over time- even LAWS are modified. Gravity-the equations- had to be modified because of Einstein. Did that mean Newton-smartest person who ever lived-was wrong? Course not- anyone whining that EVERYTHING Newton did was wrong because he wasn't fully right? Same story for Theories-they are good working explanations WORKING- EXPLANATIONS- Meaning they work and we use them to do work! Science is a working method for viewing the natural world It doesn't involve BELIEF The whole point of testable in the definition was probably to rule out folks saying my hypothesis is "God did it" Almost anything can be called a hypothesis-as long as it is testable-a STUPID SH%$ idea can be a hypothesis as long as it can be tested Now tested-doesn't mean the technology is immediately available to test it-just that it is theoretically testable. Now instructors making a BIG DEAL out of beliefs-only fools actually would do that I don't doubt some have done it-but childish to say"you don't belong in this class" Instructors are supposed to be "exposing you to -teaching" current theory They shouldn't give a sh%$ about whether you actually believe it as long as you can convincingly parrot back current theory-work whatever problems they give them Not their job to check actual "belief"- Religion is FAITH- Catholics understand that-hence their emphasis on Faith being a GIFT They believe despite there NOT being any "proof"-that is faith. If it was EASY- everyone would be a believer-One Religion etc- I am an idiot to even get in this argument-since it involves faith but science is just USEFUL if an idea allows accurate predictions-it is used No BELIEF involved-works use it-doesn't work-dump it Facts are "useful working facts"
Your statements are provably untrue. Evolution is indeed observable and should be taught to anyone seeking a practical understanding of life sciences for horticulture or animal husbandry. Anyone managing herds of livestock needs to be aware of the role of evolution in animal health. Choice of treatments for intestinal parasites need to be made with the evolution of resistance in mind. Leaving aside "micro-evolution," if you grow apples you are probably aware of the apple maggot fly which you may not know evolved from the hawthorn maggot fly in the 19th Century. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_maggot
