by EntirelyPossible 65 Replies latest jw experiences
Here's something important about falsifiability. It has to do with how a statement is worded. For example, the claim "white swans exist" is not falsifiable. There is no possible counterexample - you cannot demonstrate that white swans do not exist.
On the other hand, consider the claim "white swans do not exist." This is falsifiable because all you need to do is demonstrate one example of a white swan to disprove the claim.
Tec you have a wonderful mind,
From your questions it is obvious you have keen intelligence. Its so frustrating to hear your thirst for knowlege alongside a fear or lack of motivation to really get the answers to the questions you have. Scientific method is as watertight as we can possibly be as fallible humans. It is far more superior than faith for example. If you can think of a better way to produce theories, let the world know, you will change the world.
The truth is tec that in some areas of science we are using inferred knowlege and statistically reasoned assumptions, such as in for example, very complex quantum physics where we can't build a lab to test our beliefs. Though the science and method they use is as watertight as it can be presently, the room for mistake in that example of science cannot be compared to digging up a Neanderthal remain, or a 100 million year old dinosaur. The museums of the world are full to the brim with evolutionary proof. If anyone denies it, they first have to be honest enough to ask themselves have they ever been to see this evidence for themselves..... And then finally if they have and we're not convinced, be honest did you really know what you were looking at?
Why not give 3 years of your life to a science degree? If that's too much, go out tomorrow and buy Campbell and Reece "Biology", or The Greatest Show on Earth by Dawkins. Instead of having a wild stab at arguing against science due to gut feelings and semantics, go see it for yourself. Go to your local college, university, museum...try to prove them wrong. That's exactly what I did. But have the ingredients for 'ye olde humble pie' ready....
Please don't mistake weaknesses in science as gaps for gods existence. Once upon a time we didn't know how photons and prisms interacted so a human claimed that rainbows existed as a message that god would not perform genocide again via rain drops. I mean seriously tec, what do you believe these scientists are up to? We are talking of millions of people specialising in seeking truth. Is it a world conspiracy to claim untruths to purposefully contradict your world view, or is your world view being proven untrue by new truths discovered by millions of truth seeking scientists? As a trainee doctor, I am required to be a scholar of science. I have done university's level physics, chemistry, math and biology as well as human bio, anatomy, pathology and clinical medicine. The facts alone.... No theories.... Prove the world view I used to have wrong. Scary......yes, comforting.......no. The truth..... I 100% believe so.
I hope I haven't offended you, I certainly have no intention to.
snare x
Hmmmmm. I'm tempted to pull a dirty trick on you folks, but am worried that I might be guilty of hijacking the thread.
That dirty trick would be to actually post a hypothesis that needs falsified right here. It is one you've never heard of before, one that goes contrary to the latest "established" scientific thinking, and would have the potential to turn at least one natural science on its head. That way we could be actually using scientific methodology rather than speaking abstractly about it.
The hypothesis comes in the form of a theoretical 3 dimensional "model" (actually, 4 dimensional, inasmuch as it is necessary to envision how it will move over time.), and it's thrust will tend to relegate "Pangea" to the dustbin of nutty ideas, as well as reduce the idea of continental drift to a tiny fraction of what it is now. It does these things by offering a far better explanation for the phenomenon upon which they are based.
As in most theoretical "models", some scientific license is used to illustrate certain points. These are obvious and are later discarded when they are no longer necessary. I've already done about all the falsifying that I can, so I need your help to make sure I haven't missed anything.
Any takers?
Tom
Lone - are you talking about the Expanding earth theory?
I'm tempted to pull a dirty trick on you folks, but am worried that I might be guilty of hijacking the thread.
I'm in . . . I like a good hijacking.
Go for it. I am not sure it's a dirty trick if you are telling us. And there are some pretty smart people here that, if something fishy is in the hypothesis, it will be found pretty quickly.
I am going to add an excellent website that refutes most creationist claims, a lot I would ask myself.
And Tec, if spirits are visible, then they observable. If they are energy, they are measurable. That would fall in the realm of science. Amazingly, for something that so many people see and feel, they never seem to be either visible or measurable when recording or measuring equipment is around or when a lens flare isn't happening
I've no doubt that they DO fall into the realm of science. Just not observable or measurable with the tools that science currently possesses. Of course this is not something I can prove. I have never tried to claim otherwise.
Snare,
I appreciate your kind words, and I'm not offended at all. You didn't speak from a place that wished to offend, and that comes through. I think perhaps you misunderstand me though. I don't argue against science. Science and its findings in no way threaten my faith, which is in Christ and His Father. Science and its observations, to me, show the details in how the world works and how it was created, and where it is going. Which can help me to see more of God. (when I say created, I do not mean 'creationism', so please do not read that there.) I do not deny evolution. It does not conflict with Christ or God. Neither does a billion upon billion years of the universe, or even life on other planets, or even other universes. A literal, infallible view of the bible might conflict with those things; but I have no faith in something like that. God is a lot 'bigger' than that.
I love new discoveries in science. I do. They open up so many possibilities to our world, and universe (s), our future, and even sometimes our past.
As for taking three years for a degree... I admit to not having the motivation. Not yet, at least. I do not have the time. I barely have the time to devote myself to something I want to do, which is to write. But in the future... (I won't say when my kids no longer need me, because that never happens, lol; but when I have more time on my hands)... I might do that. Perhaps not a degree... can't justify the money on something, when I can also sit in on classes just to learn. Something like that would certainly help with my writing, some of which is sci-fi :)
Peace,
Tammy
How is something visible or something that can interact with the physical world, touching people, knocking things over, turning lights on and off, NOT measurable? It's visible and observable and physically manifests itself, just never when science is around.
How is something visible or something that can interact with the physical world, touching people, knocking things over, turning lights on and off, NOT measurable?
Well, it should be, if 'ghosts' are real and interacted in that way . But I don't have any knowledge of anything like that (other than ghost hunter shows and stuff). So I have no opinion on that one way or the other. Besides aren't there some tapes and things that are just dismissed or thought to be e x plained away, when it comes to things like this. You know, paranormal tapes or studies or whatever that show things getting knocked over or whatever? Its the cause that would still be in question, right? But I have no idea if those are real, fake, or both.
Peace,
Tammy
