Equivocation. Generally that ensures an increasingly agitated debate in which two or more sides argue based on their definition. Context is everything and I thought it clear that
@Bradskii and
@Estrid were talking about biological evolution. What you state above is true, but it is not relevant to the biological evolution.
Aside: Now it is obviously relevant to biological evolution in that it presented the environment in which evolution took place. But evolutionary mechanisms and products depend on what that enviroment is, not how it got there. It's the same reason that the origin of life is irrelevant. Evolution begins when, as Estrid puts it, we have alleles than can change.
And in neither case does it belong on my thread, or even this forum . Start an evolution thread, on the evolution forum , preferably defining terms.
So stop derailing, this thread is about scientific process Not evolution
- now check and please acknowledge I am right, in my last comment to you.
you probably have never heard of it, so it is interesting education As follows
Marie Curie found a blue glow In radium solution, the evidence.
Only decades later did Cherenkov hypothesise and demonstrate an explanation for the evidence consistent with scientific model.
that is - Electrons moving faster than speed of light in water Lose energy radiating glow
But Curies evidence stands REGARDLESS of lack of hypothesis . It was evidence that prompted further research by others, even before Cherenkov who “ solved” it . It’s how science works. Messy.
The glow doesn’t disappear for lack of hypothesis .
Nobody would investigate a glow they didn’t know existed!
so your philosopher friend has his philosophical cart squarely in front of his philosophical horse.
( except for track 2 where the model says something might exist like gravity waves)
Galaxies don’t change shape to the one that mass gravity model says they should be,
before there is a hypothesis consistent with the actual evidenced shape.
The evidence of so called Eucharistic miracles stands, and verifiable out of body consciousness , however much materialists hate it. (And even try to suppress it)
Because - in science - evidence is king.
The model is only a man made creation. It has changed and will change again.