Things that look like they were designed, probably were... If intelligence is an operative component of the universe, a science that methodologically excludes its existence will be susceptible to being trapped in an endless chase for materialistic causes that do not exist... Where there are sufficient grounds for inferring intelligent causation, based on evidence of "specified complexity," it should be considered as a component of scientific theories.
Inclusion of intelligent causation in the scientific equation is not novel and has not impeded the practice of science in the past, e.g. Newton and Kepler, in an age when science was not constrained by a philosophical materialism, and by many current scientists who have remained open to following the evidence where it leads.
Tag: science biology naturalism materialism scientific-method newton intelligent-design id kepler
I want to pause here and talk about this notion of consensus, and the rise of what has been called consensus science. I regard consensus science as an extremely pernicious development that ought to be stopped cold in its tracks. Historically, the claim of consensus has been the first refuge of scoundrels; it is a way to avoid debate by claiming that the matter is already settled. Whenever you hear the consensus of scientists agrees on something or other, reach for your wallet, because you're being had.
Let's be clear: the work of science has nothing whatever to do with consensus. Consensus is the business of politics. Science, on the contrary, requires only one investigator who happens to be right, which means that he or she has results that are verifiable by reference to the real world. In science consensus is irrelevant. What is relevant is reproducible results. The greatest scientists in history are great precisely because they broke with the consensus.
There is no such thing as consensus science. If it's consensus, it isn't science. If it's science, it isn't consensus. Period.
Tag: majority minority science global-warming evolution 9-11 scientific-method darwinism intelligent-design consensus scientific-process macro-evolution macroevolution scientific-theory scientific-research id september-11-attacks scientific-discovery excitotoxins msg fluoride scientific-inquiry scientific-revolution bisphenol-a bpa dr-jack-cohen-podiatrist majority-view man-made-global-warming manmade-global-warming minority-view monosodium-glutamate
I would remind you to notice where the claim of consensus is invoked. Consensus is invoked only in situations where the science is not solid enough. Nobody says the consensus of scientists agrees that E=mc2. Nobody says the consensus is that the sun is 93 million miles away. It would never occur to anyone to speak that way.
Michael CrichtonTag: majority minority science global-warming evolution 9-11 scientific-method darwinism intelligent-design consensus scientific-process macro-evolution macroevolution scientific-theory scientific-research id september-11-attacks scientific-discovery excitotoxins msg fluoride scientific-inquiry scientific-revolution bisphenol-a bpa majority-view man-made-global-warming manmade-global-warming minority-view monosodium-glutamate
Science is not about making predictions or performing experiments. Science is about explaining.
Bill GaedeTag: science prediction religion fact theory scientific-method experiment gaede mathematical-physics hypothesizing
Monotheism generally allows for no greys. Ideas are either true or false. Hence, although science develops out of the alchemy of the medieval Christian milieu (derived from Arabic alchemy, which was stimulated by the much earlier Chinese alchemy), science is not understood by the nonscientific monotheistic population. The general Western public mistakenly thinks science presents unalterable truth, as does their religion, rather than theories to be tested and continually discarded to be replaced by new hypotheses, which is the actual scientific method.
Jordan D. PaperTag: science christianity scientific-method
Whereas a novice makes moves until he gets checkmated (proof), a Grand Master realizes 20 moves in advance that it’s futile to continue playing (conceptualizing).
Bill GaedeTag: science prediction knowledge theory scientific-method chess proof extinction hypothesis gaede conceptualizing
The Scientific Method is a wonderful tool as long as you don't care which way the outcome turns; however, this process fails the second one's perception interferes with the interpretation of data. This is why I don’t take anything in life as an absolute…even if someone can “prove” it “scientifically.
Kent MarreroTag: humor science-fiction scientific-method proof glbt
The whole [scientific] process resembles biological evolution. A problem is like an ecological niche, and a theory is like a gene or a species which is being tested for viability in that niche.
David DeutschTag: science scientific-method
For God to prove himself on demand, physically, would be a grave disappointment, and the strongest Christians should be considerably grateful that he chooses not to do so. The skeptic endlessly demands proof, yet God refuses to insult the true intelligence of man, the '6th sense', the chief quality, the acumen which distinguishes man from the rest of creation, faith.
Criss JamiTag: science intelligence perception strength existence philosophy christianity god spiritual faith atheism burden-of-proof atheist creation christian disappointment quality skepticism scientific-method comprehension grave evidence supernatural proof apologetics insult agnosticism gratefulness refusal senses theism physical strength-of-spirit existence-of-god 6th-sense sixth-sense demanding acumen apologist spiritual-realm
Pseudoscience is almost always recognizable from a distance, and easy to confirm on close examination. Science is, however, not immune from hubris, and bad science can be tougher to spot. Those of us who make a living from science or science media must display scientific integrity. We must constantly test our assumptions and fight the siren song of consensus when our data tells us to be contrarian. We must remain independent of political or religious bias in evaluating our work. We must admit when we are wrong, and remain willing to evolve when verifiable data demands change. We must admit when we are uncertain, remain humble in advances, and offer courageous and independent advice grounded in science.
K. Lee LernerTag: science politics history scientific-method pseudoscience
« prima precedente
Pagina 2 di 4.
prossimo ultimo »
Data privacy
Imprint
Contact
Diese Website verwendet Cookies, um Ihnen die bestmögliche Funktionalität bieten zu können.