What is the Falsification for Abiogenesis and Theory of Evolution?

[VirOptimus]

Right, because it's all theory. Even the theory of gravity. Are you really claiming that the laws of science never get modified? Really?

do you know what a scientific theory entails?

 

[renniks]

Speculation is pre-science. It becomes science with testable hypothesis that can be supported or falsified.

Science is method, religion is belief, they are only enemies for those who do not understand them.

Oh, there's plenty of belief in evolution "science". Belief that they speculated correctly. Which usually turns out, is not the case in the long run.

 

[Hans Blaster]

Nonsense.
As physicists investigate the most fundamental characteristics of nature, they’re tackling issues that have long been the province of philosophers and theologians: Is the universe infinite and eternal? Why does it seem to follow mathematical laws, and are those laws inevitable? And, the most important, why does the universe exist? Why is there something instead of nothing?
Quantum theory is now the foundation of particle physics, and the theory has revealed aspects of nature that seem supernatural: the act of observing something can apparently alter its reality, for example. Science can certainly speak about these issues and should.

Science doesn't do "why" per se and quantum mechanics isn't supernatural, doesn't look supernatural, or imply the supernatural.

Physicists doing philosphy is bad physics and probably bad philosophy. (Who really cares? philosophy is garbage anyway.)

 

[renniks]

do you know what a scientific theory entails?

A scientific theory is an explanation of an aspect of the natural world and universe that can be repeatedly tested and verified in accordance with the scientific method, using accepted protocols of observation, measurement, and evaluation of results, blah, blah, blah.

 

[renniks]

Science doesn't do "why" per se and quantum mechanics isn't supernatural, doesn't look supernatural, or imply the supernatural.

Physicists doing philosphy is bad physics and probably bad philosophy. (Who really cares? philosophy is garbage anyway.)

Well, that's open-minded of you, lol.

 

[VirOptimus]

A scientific theory is an explanation of an aspect of the natural world and universe that can be repeatedly tested and verified in accordance with the scientific method, using accepted protocols of observation, measurement, and evaluation of results, blah, blah, blah.

How childish.

 

[Hans Blaster]

Well, that's open-minded of you, lol.

If you're looking for "deeper meaning" in the Heisenberg uncertainty then you're not doing physics or yourself any favors. It just ends up sounding like nonsense and it results in some of the kinds of things I've seen here and elsewhere.

 

[Frank Robert]

Oh, there's plenty of belief in evolution "science". Belief that they speculated correctly. Which usually turns out, is not the case in the long run.

Doesn't your labeling of any science as belief or faith devalue your own beliefs and your own faith?

I think I relayed the story of Joseph Campbell but in case I didn't here it is again:

I had a very amusing experience, which might be well worth telling. I was in the New York Athletic Club swimming pool, and you know, you don’t wear your collar this way or that way when you’re in a swimming pool. And I was introduced to a priest, “This is Father So-and-so, this is Joseph Campbell.” I’m a professor, he’s a professor at one of our Catholic universities. So after I’d had my swim, I came and sat down beside, in what we call, you know, the horizontal athlete situation, and the priest is beside me. And he said, “Mr. Campbell, are you a priest?” I said, “No, Father.” He said, “Are you a Catholic?” I said, “I was, Father.” He said, and now he had the sense to ask it this way, “Do you believe in a personal God?” I said, “No, Father.” And he said, “Well, I suppose there is no way to prove by logic the existence of a personal God.” And I said, “If there were, Father, what would be the value of faith?” “Well, Mr. Campbell, it’s nice to have met you.” And he was off. I really felt I had done a jujitsu trick there.

 

[Frank Robert]

A scientific theory is an explanation of an aspect of the natural world and universe that can be repeatedly tested and verified in accordance with the scientific method, using accepted protocols of observation, measurement, and evaluation of results, blah, blah, blah.

You parrot it well but continuously show no understanding. I don't mean to devalue parroting because my parrots have shown that understand a lot of what they are repeating.

 

[Frank Robert]

Right, because it's all theory. Even the theory of gravity. Are you really claiming that the laws of science never get modified? Really?

You are again display a misunderstanding of science. The weakest scientific statement is the hypothesis because it has the lease support. A theory is supported by much more evidence but still can be displaced by a better supported theory. Even scientific laws do not express absolute certainty. In that sense they differs from religious dogma that is held to be incontrovertibly true by the believer.

 

[AV1611VET]

You are again display a misunderstanding of science. The weakest scientific statement is the hypothesis because it has the lease support. A theory is supported by much more evidence but still can be displaced by a better supported theory. Even scientific laws do not express absolute certainty. In that sense they differs from religious dogma that is held to be incontrovertibly true by the believer.

Yes, science comes with an escape hatch.

 

[Hans Blaster]

Yes, science comes with an escape hatch.

It's not a dogma, so it can change to fit our understanding of reality.

 

[AV1611VET]

It's not a dogma, so it can change to fit our understanding of reality.

No argument there.

Science isn't omniscient, it is myopic.

 

[driewerf]

No argument there.

Science isn't omniscient, it is myopic.

Myopic science sees still more than blind faith.

 

[renniks]

Doesn't your labeling of any science as belief or faith devalue your own beliefs and your own faith?

No, because I admit I have faith. The people arguing for evolution claim they have facts. What they really have is some information and a lot of speculation.

 

[renniks]

You are again display a misunderstanding of science. The weakest scientific statement is the hypothesis because it has the lease support. A theory is supported by much more evidence but still can be displaced by a better supported theory. Even scientific laws do not express absolute certainty. In that sense they differs from religious dogma that is held to be incontrovertibly true by the believer.

Which I just said with less words...
It's all theories. It's not proven facts.
Next week or next year there will be new theories.
We only see through a glass darkly, when we look at the material world, or to put it in another way, we're only seeing one part of the elephant.

 

[VirOptimus]

Which I just said with less words...
It's all theories. It's not proven facts.
Next week or next year there will be new theories.
We only see through a glass darkly, when we look at the material world, or to put it in another way, we're only seeing one part of the elephant.

No that is completly wrong.

Scientific theories explains the facts and data, all of it.

 

[renniks]

No that is completly wrong.

Scientific theories explains the facts and data, all of it.

Lol, I was just told there are no facts in science... you all need to make up your minds.

 

[VirOptimus]

Lol, I was just told there are no facts in science... you all need to make up your minds.

You where not told any such thing.

 

[Speedwell]

Lol, I was just told there are no facts in science... you all need to make up your minds.

No, you were told that theories are not facts.