Please explain how the Big Bang theory and the theory of evolution are arrived on using the scientific method.
-
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
-
CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.
The Scientific Method
- Thread starter Northern Christian
- Start date
J
Jet Black
Guest
Northern Christian
could you respond to my Cosmic Microwave Background thread a page or two ago, thanks.
could you respond to my Cosmic Microwave Background thread a page or two ago, thanks.
Upvote
0
Where exactly is this? Please post a link.Jet Black said:
As you yet no one has been able to show me how they arrived at evolution using the scientific method.
Upvote
0
Northern Christian said:
Maybe you should think about the scope of what you are asking. The current theory of evolution is the product of 150 years of scientific research. Observations were made, hypotheses were formed, experiments were performed, conclusions were drawn, etc.
If you want all the details your best bet is to read a book on the subject. There's a list of good books over at IIDB: http://www.iidb.org/vbb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=44461
Upvote
0
Here are two articles at Wiki about the Scientific Method and a Scientific theory:
http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method
http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_theory
One of the biggest differences between real science and creationism is that real science lets All the evidence lead them to a theory. Creationism comes to a conclusion and then chooses or throws away evidence to fit their conclusion.
http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method
http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_theory
One of the biggest differences between real science and creationism is that real science lets All the evidence lead them to a theory. Creationism comes to a conclusion and then chooses or throws away evidence to fit their conclusion.
Northern Christian said:
Upvote
0
Big bang cosmology and the theory of evolution were arrived at by the scientific method by a combination of observation, hypothesis, and testing. How do you think they were arrived at?
Upvote
0
ReUsAbLePhEoNiX
Liberated from SinComplex
The Scientific Method
the first step is observation, you observe a series of events.
after considering the observations, the scientist seeks to generalize about them, that is too make a statement of observation, such as their cause, mechanism and relationship to each other. this statement becomes a hypothesis. to have any scientific value the hypothesis must then be tested.
On the basis of the hypothesis, the scientist must make a prediction about future observations. they would say something like" If my hypothesis is a valid explination of past observations, then future observations ought to have certian characteristics." If the observations do have such characteristics, they constitute evidence in favor of the hypothesis and the hypothesis gains strength as an explination of the events.
An experiment is a manipulative process by which a prediction made on the basis of the hypothesis can be tested.
If the results observed are as predicted, the hypothesis is supported (not proved), but if the results(data) are other wise, the hypothesis is invalidated.
The condition that has been applied and is being tested is reffered to as the experimental variable.
to have confidence that the experiemental variable is responsible for the effect observed, another entity just like the first one must be subjected to all the conditions that prevailed during the experiement except the experiemental variaiable. This is called the control.
So if a Hypothesis is supported by a great deal of data, and it explains a wide variety of related phenomena, the hypothesis may attain the status of theory.
such as the Theory of My Coolness
Remember the word theory does not mean "speculation" like is does in the common English
the first step is observation, you observe a series of events.
after considering the observations, the scientist seeks to generalize about them, that is too make a statement of observation, such as their cause, mechanism and relationship to each other. this statement becomes a hypothesis. to have any scientific value the hypothesis must then be tested.
On the basis of the hypothesis, the scientist must make a prediction about future observations. they would say something like" If my hypothesis is a valid explination of past observations, then future observations ought to have certian characteristics." If the observations do have such characteristics, they constitute evidence in favor of the hypothesis and the hypothesis gains strength as an explination of the events.
An experiment is a manipulative process by which a prediction made on the basis of the hypothesis can be tested.
If the results observed are as predicted, the hypothesis is supported (not proved), but if the results(data) are other wise, the hypothesis is invalidated.
The condition that has been applied and is being tested is reffered to as the experimental variable.
to have confidence that the experiemental variable is responsible for the effect observed, another entity just like the first one must be subjected to all the conditions that prevailed during the experiement except the experiemental variaiable. This is called the control.
So if a Hypothesis is supported by a great deal of data, and it explains a wide variety of related phenomena, the hypothesis may attain the status of theory.
such as the Theory of My Coolness
Remember the word theory does not mean "speculation" like is does in the common English
Upvote
0
lucaspa
Legend
Northern Christian said:
Have you read Origin of the Species? Darwin details it right there.
Transformation of species started as a hypothesis to explain data people (including but not specific to Darwin) had gathered about species in biogeography, morphology, embryology, and physiology.
Here, let me quote some of Darwin to you about species:
"Nor shall I discuss here the various definitions which have been given of of the term species. No one definition has satisfied all naturalists; yet every naturalist knows vaguely what he means when he speaks of a species. Generally the term includes the unknown element of a distanct act of creation. The term 'variety' is almost equally difficult to define; but here community of descent is almost universally implied, though it can rarely be proved." Charles Darwin, Origin of the Species, 6th edition, pg 58
"Hence, in determining whether a form should be ranked as a species or a variety, the opinion of naturalists having sound judgement and wide experience seems the only guide to follow. We must, however, in many cases, decide by a majority of naturalists, for few well-marked and wll-known varieties can be named which have not been ranked as species by at least some competent judge." pg 62
"Some few naturalists maintain that animals never present varieties; but then these same naturalists rank the lightest difference as of specific value; and when the same indetical form is met with in two distant countries, or in two geological formaions, they believe that two distinct species are hidden under the same dress. The term species thus comes to be a mere useless abstraction, implying and assuming a separate act of creation. It is certain that many forms, considered by highly-competent judges to be varieties, resemble species so completely in character, that they have been thus ranked by other highly-competent judeges. But to discuss whether they ought to be called species or varieties, before any definition of these terms has been generally accepted, is vainly to beat the air." pg 64
Darwin describes the work of De Candolle, who had done an exhaustive study of oak species and varieties.
"De Candolle then goes on to say that he gives teh rank of species to the forms that differ by characters never varying on the same tree, and never found connected by intermediate states. After this discussion, the result of so much labour, he emphatically remarks: 'They are mistaken, who repeat taht the greater part of our species are clearly limited, and that the doubtful species are in a feeble minority. This seems to gbe true, so long as a genus is imperfectly known, and its species were founded upon a few specimens, that is to say, were provisional. Just as we come to know them better, imtermediate forms flow in, and doubts as to specific limits augment.'" pg 65
"Finally, De Candolle admits that out of the 300 species, which will be enumerated in hs Prodromus as belonging to the oak family, at least two-thirds are provisional species, that is, are not known strictly to fulfil the definition above given of a true species. It should be added that De Candolle no longer believes that species ae immutable creations, but concludes that the derivative theory is the most natural one, 'and the most accordant with the known facts in paleontology, geographical botany and zoology, of anatomical structure and classification.'" pg 65
Darwin concludes:
"Certainly no clear line of demarcation has as yet been drawn between species and sub-species --that is, the forms which in the opinion of some naturalists come very near to, but do not quite arrive at, the rank of species: or, again, between sub-species and well-marked varieties, or between lesser varieties and individual differences. These differences blend into each other by an insensible series; and a series impresses the mind with the idea of an actual passage." Charles Darwin, Origin of the Species, 6th edition, pg 66
Right here we have the beginnings of the hypothesis of descent with modification. Evolution, in other words.
Evolution is an explanation for observations. The first step in what you were taught as the scientific method.
Natural selection comes about as an explanation for the cause of the modifications, particularly the designs. Here is how Darwin summarized natural selection:
"If, during the long course of ages and under varying conditions of life, organic beings vary at all in the several parts of their organization, and I think this cannot be disputed; if there be, owing to the high geometric powers of increase of each species, at some age, season, or year, a severe struggle for life, and this certainly cannot be disputed; then, considering the infinite complexity of the relations of all organic beings to each other and to their conditions of existence, causing an infinite diversity in structure, constitution, and habits, to be advantageous to them, I think it would be a most extraordinary fact if no variation ever had occurred useful to each beings welfare, in the same way as so many variations have occured useful to man. But if variations useful to any organic being do occur, assuredly individuals thus characterized will have the best chance of being preserved in the struggle for life; and from the strong principle of inheritance they will will tend to produce offspring similarly characterized. This principle of preservation, I have called, for the sake of brevity, Natural Selection." [Origin, p 127 6th ed.]
What we have are observations on variation, geometric increase in population, limited resources, struggle for existence, inheritance. The logical hypothesis from all that is natural selection. Design.
Then you go out and test the hypotheses -- descent with modification and natural selection -- in an attempt to falsify them. That has been done in several different ways, and we can talk about them in detail.
Does this set your mind at ease that evolution came from the scientific method?
Upvote
0
Similar threads
