From owner-freebsd-chat Sun Sep 8 18:48: 4 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.FreeBSD.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EA6DE37B400 for ; Sun, 8 Sep 2002 18:48:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hokkshideh2.jetcafe.org (hokkshideh2.jetcafe.org [64.239.180.8]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7699743E3B for ; Sun, 8 Sep 2002 18:48:01 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from dave@jetcafe.org) Received: from hokkshideh2.jetcafe.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by hokkshideh2.jetcafe.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g891lx125265; Sun, 8 Sep 2002 18:47:59 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from dave@hokkshideh2.jetcafe.org) Message-Id: <200209090147.g891lx125265@hokkshideh2.jetcafe.org> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.5 07/13/2001 with nmh-1.0.4 To: "Neal E. Westfall" Cc: Terry Lambert , chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Why did evolution fail? Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Sun, 08 Sep 2002 18:47:54 -0700 From: Dave Hayes Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Neal E Westfall writes: >> "Neal E. Westfall" wrote: >> > Who is second-guessing the scientific method? I happen to think it works >> > quite well, when allowed to truly work. Problem with evolution is that, >> > almost 150 years later, it is no more closer to being empirically verified >> > than it was in 1859. So lets drop it and get on with something else >> > already. >> >> The scientific method never verifies, it only falsifies, so asking >> that something be empirically verified, whether it be the old theory >> of evolution, the current theory of puctuated equilibria, or that >> gravity is related to the curvature of space, is asking for the >> impossible. Science can only demonstrate the invalidity of ideas, >> not their validity. > > Okay, then lets stop pretending that creation is "unscientific" while > evolution is "scientific". Neither one of them can be falsified, so > either *both* of them are scientific, or neither of them are. The point is missed that perhaps *both* are right. It is not far afield to consider that God created the notion of evolution and this process is how He made the world. > I don't know if you realize it or not, but here in California if > you try to teach a theory of origins other than evolution, you > *will* be fired. So what happended to all the "open-minded" > attitudes and academic freedom? You aren't going to get him on this. He's just going to claim that administrators and lawmakers are not Real Scientists". ------ Dave Hayes - Consultant - Altadena CA, USA - dave@jetcafe.org >>> The opinions expressed above are entirely my own <<< It is difficult to believe that someone can differ from us and be right. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message