'Beaver' lived amid dinosaurs It seems that science does not need to be scientific anymore. Each scientific article that touts millions of years puts it into the arena faith because it is not science. In the public square, the ideas of intelligent design are mocked and counted as unscientific while there is peer-reviewed scientific data substantiating the theory. But articles that lack just the basic science are touted as science. This is quite perplexing .
True science, observational science, should be reported/taught as science. For years, scientists have been pulling away from the evolution model, because of the lack of evidence. Even Richard Dawkins cannot give one, just one, example of molecular or macroevolution. If such a renowned scientist cannot explain it, with the billions of fossils, then those reporting on the subject should be not cover it as fact. The integrity of science needs to be kept and hypothesis, such as evolution, should be taught and associated with philosophy or a belief system.
We are here to educate people about science and evolution is bad science. For an institution to fail in presenting the facts about evolution is disingenuous. There are no facts in proving evolution, none.
Scientific Method is as follows: 1. Observation 2. Formulation of an hypothesis to explain the phenomena. 3. Use of the hypothesis to predict quantitatively the results of new observations. 4. Performance of experimental tests of the predictions by several independent experimenters.
Neither meets the base requirements of the scientific method and there is ample evidence to support ID. In fact, the same facts the evolutions misinterpret the data available and use faulty arguments to cover the gaps in this theory.
Yeah, I agree with you Bob. I may add that evolution cannot be a hard science since evolutionist cannot recreate the conditions to start the "experiment of evolution" itself. In other words, what I am saying is, what evolutionist do find is "ex post facto" , always after all had been done, after the fact. They cannot design, observe, and conclude on an activity which they see with their own eyes.
At best, since evolutionists are forced to reason backwards, whether with adequate logic or where the blind adherence to evolution would take them, they are in fact forcing the public, our students to take evolution as part of hard science, when in fact it should be a 'half-hard science'
Evolution cannot be compared to the likes of mechanics, electrodynamics, thermodynamics, where actual experiments can be performed. At worst, it shows a little facts more than intelligent design
More facts will be unearthed though, to overthrow more tenets of evolution. The fact is, this is a science which increasingly prove itself wrong as it tries to prove itself right.
What science/evidence is there to prove the theory of creationism? What proof is there that the Universe didn't exist 7,000 years ago? All there is opinions based on speculation to uphold creationism. At the least, evolution is based on reason and scientific knowledge, not simply by stating, I think, so it is. Regardless, arguing about creationism is as fruitless as arguing about what God looks like on Saturday mornings. Creationists need to worry more about being a loving, caring, giving souls and loving all of Gods creation regardless of culture, ethincity, gender, sexual orientation and not just those that look like them and think like them.
There are WAY too many articles supporting this claim to reference in ONE posting. IF you are REALLY open minded as many people claim to be then you will check out this web-site and read some of the evidence against the "theory" of evolution. Otherwise there is no reason to even talk to you since you are not willing to listen or learn...
So do you think all superstition of the past 4 posts was the same guy/gal cutting and pasting under different accounts? Or do they have multiple individuals do that now?
It's a reinforcement of their securoty blanket....
These people have a personal belief which is incapable of questioning itself and which is totally intolerant of anyone else questioning it. That's their privilege and choice, and as long as they keep it to themselves, and as long as it makes them better human beings, what they believe is no concern of mine.
But I do get a bit irritated at such people when they start telling other people that legitimate science is a fraud and their myth structure is the only correct interpretation. And I get a bit irritated at tall he pseudo-science they splash around to try to support their claims. But getting irritated doesn't accomplish anything. There people are so sure they are right - or are so desperate to believe that they are right - that no countering words will make any difference.
Use the courts and laws to keep them from messing up education with their myths. And hope that in the long run, education will actually educate the people.
The Chinese are not blinded by science. I think that one of the reasons that the Chinese are finding these kinds of fossils is that they are coming with fewer pre-conceived notions about the scientific timeline. I imagine that Western scientific models have blinded us to the many fossils that are right under our feet.
Any paleontologist would have jumped at the chance to present the Chinese fossils, just to eliminate any pre-concieved notions. There are lots of differing opinions many areas of the fossil evidence. And the intllectual combat among these opinion holders is what gives paleontology its robustness, it's total lack of any mind set about what the answers should be. No blindness exists. There is just the need to develop credibility when a new opinion is presented.
Web giant is spending $120 million to beef up its Mountain View, Calif., headquarters, according to filings with the city reviewed by the San Jose Mercury News.
The Samsung Galaxy mini 2 S6500 could make its debut at the Mobile World Congress in Barcelona later this month, according to a leaked promotional image.
Tor's "obfsproxy" technology would make encrypted data look innocuous and let it dodge government censors. That could help citizens in Iran reach blocked sites as antigovernment protests reportedly loom.
MIT creates a simulation to celebrate the 50th anniversary of Spacewar. A relic of the early days of minicomputers, it was one of the first computer video games and set the stage for many others, including Asteroids.
True science, observational science, should be reported/taught as science. For years, scientists have been pulling away from the evolution model, because of the lack of evidence. Even Richard Dawkins cannot give one, just one, example of molecular or macroevolution. If such a renowned scientist cannot explain it, with the billions of fossils, then those reporting on the subject should be not cover it as fact. The integrity of science needs to be kept and hypothesis, such as evolution, should be taught and associated with philosophy or a belief system.
We are here to educate people about science and evolution is bad science. For an institution to fail in presenting the facts about evolution is disingenuous. There are no facts in proving evolution, none.
Scientific Method is as follows:
1. Observation
2. Formulation of an hypothesis to explain the phenomena.
3. Use of the hypothesis to predict quantitatively the results of new observations.
4. Performance of experimental tests of the predictions by several independent experimenters.
Neither meets the base requirements of the scientific method and there is ample evidence to support ID. In fact, the same facts the evolutions misinterpret the data available and use faulty arguments to cover the gaps in this theory.
At best, since evolutionists are forced to reason backwards, whether with adequate logic or where the blind adherence to evolution would take them, they are in fact forcing the public, our students to take evolution as part of hard science, when in fact it should be a 'half-hard science'
Evolution cannot be compared to the likes of mechanics, electrodynamics, thermodynamics, where actual experiments can be performed. At worst, it shows a little facts more than intelligent design
More facts will be unearthed though, to overthrow more tenets of evolution. The fact is, this is a science which increasingly prove itself wrong as it tries to prove itself right.
www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/qa.asp
questioning itself and which is totally intolerant of anyone else
questioning it. That's their privilege and choice, and as long as
they keep it to themselves, and as long as it makes them better
human beings, what they believe is no concern of mine.
But I do get a bit irritated at such people when they start telling
other people that legitimate science is a fraud and their myth
structure is the only correct interpretation. And I get a bit
irritated at tall he pseudo-science they splash around to try to
support their claims. But getting irritated doesn't accomplish
anything. There people are so sure they are right - or are so
desperate to believe that they are right - that no countering
words will make any difference.
Use the courts and laws to keep them from messing up
education with their myths. And hope that in the long run,
education will actually educate the people.
Chinese fossils, just to eliminate any pre-concieved notions. There
are lots of differing opinions many areas of the fossil evidence. And
the intllectual combat among these opinion holders is what gives
paleontology its robustness, it's total lack of any mind set about
what the answers should be. No blindness exists. There is just the
need to develop credibility when a new opinion is presented.