Reciprocating Bill
Posts: 4265
Joined: Oct. 2006
|
| Quote (Daniel Smith @ Mar. 15 2009,15:04) | I must point out however, that your objections were in regard to my general prediction. I am attempting to narrow down my general (untestable) prediction to specific (testable) predictions. My specific prediction (implied by the general prediction) is that, right now, at this moment, if you attempt to reconstruct an evolutionary pathway--that leads from the time when amino acids were not synthesized within the organism to the present E. coli synthesis biopathway--your attempt will fail to convince the scientific community.
It may still not be scientific (don't know, don't care), but it IS a prediction. It CAN be tested. It CAN be proven wrong at any time.
Now, it's easy to predict that you personally won't be able to do it - it's another thing altogether to predict that the best scientist currently working on the problem (whoever that may be), will also fail on every attempt. That too is implied by my prediction however.
So while the general prediction (that all scientists will fail until the end of time) cannot be empirically verified, the specific prediction (that you personally will fail on your next attempt) can be.
Now, it is still true that my predictions "concern future history only" (A "prediction" of past events is no prediction Bill), "are incapable of guiding empirical research", and "put no unique POSITIVE assertions to the test", and if that disqualifies them as "scientific" I'm OK with that.
I'm perfectly content just being right. |
Hahahaha!
That's got to be your dumbest post EVAR, Daniel. Your "argument from impossibility?" Let's get to patting its face with a shovel.
--------------
Myth: Something that never was true, and always will be.
"The truth will set you free. But not until it is finished with you."
- David Foster Wallace
"Here’s a clue. Snarky banalities are not a substitute for saying something intelligent. Write that down."
- Barry Arrington
|
