blipey
Posts: 2061
Joined: June 2006
|
| Quote (GaryGaulin @ Dec. 20 2012,16:53) | | Quote (Erasmus @ FCD,Dec. 20 2012,09:55) | | Quote (GaryGaulin @ Dec. 20 2012,09:59) | | Quote | Theory:
A plausible or scientifically acceptable, well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world; an organized system of accepted knowledge that applies in a variety of circumstances to explain a specific set of phenomena and predict the characteristics of as yet unobserved phenomena.
http://www.nationalacademies.org/evoluti....ns.html
|
|
Why, nothing. Let's go with it.
So, in order for your "theory" to be "scientifically acceptable" you must present it for acceptance to science. Surely even you understand that Planet Sorcerer Code is not a venue that could grant you this acclaim, no? Neither is AtBC or any other blog. Try journals
"well substantitated explanation of some aspect of the natural world"-- here is where your shit begins to fall apart. You've ran away from the question of what it is that your theory explains. You haven't explained what "aspects of the natural world" your theory describes. If you disagree, please (in bullet points preferably) list the "aspects of the natural world" your theory explains.
"organized system of accepted knowledge"-- Yeah, you got none of that. But, you could change that, right? Try to get your theory published, for one.
"explain a specific set of phenomena"-- you haven't got this either. just vague handwavings about what you could do with your computer program
"predict the characteristics of as yet unobserved phenomena"-- You not only don't have this, but you will never have this because you say it's "not your job" to do this. LOL
Your theory is fail Gary |
You are so FOS I'm not wasting time responding to your nutcase rant. |
Excellent, Gary! Come back when you can articulate even one sentence about what you disagree with here. Sure, it would probably take 2 minutes of your time and I know that you're busy doing whatever so I understand your unwillingness to spend 2 minutes detailing an argument for your case. Carry on.
--------------
But I get the trick question- there isn't any such thing as one molecule of water. -JoeG
And scientists rarely test theories. -Gary Gaulin
|
