Home Propeller Head Plaza

Technical and scientific discussion of amps, cables and other topics.

Science is, by definition, proof.

How do we consider something scientific fact if it is not proven?

History is unobservable but it as been observed, otherwise it would not be history. There plenty of areas of this planet where we have no record whatsoever of what it's inhabitants did at given periods of time. In other words, we don't have any history. I don't mean to be so elementary but we must not confuse ideas here and that is what occurred in your original post.

Bowlen's definition is not very definitive is it? It is merely an open ended statement of philosophical naturalism/materialism which contains absolutely no explanatory power (or perhaps infinite explanatory power, which is the same thing scientifically). This is decidedly unscientific. What other area of science would tolerate such a vacuous explanation for a phenomena? The fact is Darwin's theory is evolution. There has yet to be an alternative offered that has been accepted on any kind of scale.

Of course genetic variation occurs and has occurred. This is not evolution. It is just variation. It tells us that dogs come in many colors and sizes. It does not tell us that dogs will become non-dogs or that they came from non-dogs.

How do you define faith? Is it not intellectual assent to a body of data without regard to it's empirical veracity? The only difference between various creation stories and Darwin's theory is that Darwin postulates natural processes in his story as opposed supernatural. His mechanism however, is just as unobservable as any supernatural one.


This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
  VH Audio  


Follow Ups Full Thread
Follow Ups


You can not post to an archived thread.