Re: Evolution and Observation Gap

Mark VandeWettering wrote:
On 2006-03-19, topmind <topmind@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Anyone wanna comment on this new write-up of mine?:

'Why Evolution is a "Theory" and not a "Fact"'

http://www.geocities.com/tablizer/observe.htm

It's not very good. In particular, it's basic premise, that facts need
to be "fully observed" to be called "fact" is an arbitrary and not
particularly useful definition, and directly at odds with how science
normally defines "fact". Nobody has ever observed Pluto complete an
orbit of the sun, but it is entirely irrational to claim that it is not
a fact that it does.

Perhaps a brown dwarf or small black hole comes around every few
hundred years and changes the orbit of Pluto or steels it away. Low
probability, but not zero.


The rest of your essay does precisely what your previous essay on
ID did: argue irrelevencies. In general, genetic algorithms and
evolutionary computation aren't biological evolution, and nobody claims
that they are. Therefore, nothing abut these topics is at all
useful in deciding if evolution is a fact, just as you are incapable
of showing that ID is science by talking about SETI.

I think I did a pretty good job on that. You guys could not find a
consistent divider between SETI and ID-DNA-hunts. You couldn't, so
don't pretend you did. You only had waffling personal opinions.

Observation *should* be a requirement for "fact". If you have a formal
consensus definition of "fact", then let's see the damned thing.
Otherwise stop posing as if you are the center of the definition
universe.


Mark

-T-

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: topmind: ID is potentially testable
    ... start with the Wikipedia entry on Evolution and follow the links from ... science" accusations more seriously. ... it's not just the appearance of rabbits in the old ... Those appear to be papers by the people who support/run SETI, ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: topmind: ID is potentially testable
    ... I dispute your charactericterization of science. ... What test do you propose which can falsify ID? ... Same with evo or SETI. ... As for evolution: it exists. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Evolution and Observation Gap
    ... particularly useful definition, and directly at odds with how science ... of showing that ID is science by talking about SETI. ... You call yourself topmind? ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Evolution and Observation Gap
    ... particularly useful definition, and directly at odds with how science ... of showing that ID is science by talking about SETI. ... You call yourself topmind? ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Evolution and Observation Gap
    ... particularly useful definition, and directly at odds with how science ... of showing that ID is science by talking about SETI. ... ID posits unknow intelligences with unknow capabilities and motives. ...
    (talk.origins)