RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

Pages: (3) < [1] 2 3 >   
  Topic: Common Descent - Evidence No.1< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  
Wesley R. Elsberry

Posts: 4937
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: April 15 2005,08:58   

That's folderol, Michael. "Logically produced" statements include both universal statements (to which one can then apply modus tollens to, as Popper famously noted) and existential statements (to which one cannot apply modus tollens). So even by Michael's connotation of "prediction" as a "logically produced statement", he hasn't constrained the output to the desired class of universal statements.

There is a term in logic for strict logical implication. Let's see how long it takes for Michael to comes up with it.

Then, Michael can go back to the statement by Theobald at the start of this thread and try to apply his distinction there. To me, it sure looks like that would put the theory at risk if it were found to be false. Which, I will remind Michael, was already noted by me in my statement, and which he failed to address:


There are possible states of the evidence that common descent would not be able to accommodate.

"You can't teach an old dogma new tricks." - Dorothy Parker

  77 replies since Mar. 30 2005,01:21 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Pages: (3) < [1] 2 3 >   

Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

[ Read the Board Rules ] | [Useful Links] | [Evolving Designs]