RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

    
  Topic: No scientific evidence == nonexistence?< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  
stevestory



Posts: 8990
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: April 14 2006,04:27   

does it?

   
Corkscrew



Posts: 20
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: April 14 2006,05:40   

I'd say that: no scientific evidence => it's not useful to accept existence.

If you can't make valid predictions of any sort about what X will do next, then it's not advantageous to consider X as a factor in your calculations - you'll do just as well on average if you simply ignore X and get on with your life.

This doesn't necessarily mean that X doesn't exist, but it does mean that belief in the existence of X is fairly daft - if nothing else, it's a waste of valuable brain resources, which aren't something that most people are overly blessed with to start with...

  
Stephen Elliott



Posts: 1754
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: April 14 2006,06:41   

Quote (stevestory @ April 14 2006,09:27)
does it?

Nope.

If that was the case, Quantum effects did not hapen until about the mid-20th Century.

Gravity did not work before Newton.

And the speed of light only became absolute after Einstein was born.

  
Sanctum



Posts: 88
Joined: Feb. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: April 14 2006,07:12   

And there was no DNA 60 years ago, no radioactivity 150 years ago and no electricity a few hundred years before that.

What a tremendous exercise of the brain, and for science, to ponder the existence of things beyond the current limits of our observations and tests.

  
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: April 14 2006,07:27   

Quote (Stephen Elliott @ April 14 2006,11:41)
Quote (stevestory @ April 14 2006,09:27)
does it?

Nope.

If that was the case, Quantum effects did not hapen until about the mid-20th Century.

Gravity did not work before Newton.

And the speed of light only became absolute after Einstein was born.

But those aren't examples of no scientific evidence! The evidence was all over, humans just weren't in a position to see it yet.

Lack of comprehension isn't the same as lack of evidence.

--------------
"Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

  
jeannot



Posts: 1200
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: April 14 2006,07:35   

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

  
Mr_Christopher



Posts: 1238
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: April 14 2006,07:42   

Speaking of evidence take a look at this gem I got from the IDnet in AU:

Quote
Actually, after 10 years we still do not have a single, peer reviewed study in any scientific journal that actually has falsified Irreducible Complexity.


Gosh, that proves IC is true, and that proves the existance of space aliens and time travelers!

--------------
Uncommon Descent is a moral cesspool, a festering intellectual ghetto that intoxicates and degrades its inhabitants - Stephen Matheson

  
Sanctum



Posts: 88
Joined: Feb. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: April 14 2006,07:56   

Once a discovery is made it is apparent, in retrospect, that the evidence was always there.
At certain times there just aren't the tools, techniques, knowledge or mindset necessary to see it for what it is.

  
Jay Ray



Posts: 92
Joined: Feb. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: April 14 2006,08:11   

Quote
Once a discovery is made it is apparent, in retrospect, that the evidence was always there.
At certain times there just aren't the tools, techniques, knowledge or mindset necessary to see it for what it is.



Sure.   And at certain other times, people cling to cherished notions that are utterly bogus, or at least unknowable one way or the other.  The tricky part is deciding how to distinguish fact from fancy.  

Oh, btw we call that trick, "the scientific method."  In layman's terms this is sometimes known as "The Fine Art of Baloney Detection."

  
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: April 14 2006,08:19   

Quote (Mr_Christopher @ April 14 2006,12:42)
Speaking of evidence take a look at this gem I got from the IDnet in AU:

Quote
Actually, after 10 years we still do not have a single, peer reviewed study in any scientific journal that actually has falsified Irreducible Complexity.


Gosh, that proves IC is true, and that proves the existance of space aliens and time travelers!

Shoot, this now means that as long as it wasn't disproved in a peer-reviewed journal, everything I ever wanted to believe is now true!!

Well, he11, this changes everything...

--------------
"Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

  
Sanctum



Posts: 88
Joined: Feb. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: April 14 2006,08:21   

I wish I'd heard about this "science" thing before. It sounds fascinating.

Separating fact from fantasy is an excellent idea.

  
Chris Hyland



Posts: 705
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: April 14 2006,08:30   

Quote
Actually, after 10 years we still do not have a single, peer reviewed study in any scientific journal that actually has falsified Irreducible Complexity.
That coudn't be anything to do with the fact that they keep changing the definition does it?

  
guthrie



Posts: 696
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: April 14 2006,09:06   

I dont recall any peer reviewed journal publication about Irreducible complexity.  

So their point is somewhat like saying "My team won the match because your team didnt turn up to beat them, even though my team doesnt exist at all."
Or in other words, total mince.

  
Stephen Elliott



Posts: 1754
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: April 14 2006,09:12   

Quote (Arden Chatfield @ April 14 2006,12:27)
Quote (Stephen Elliott @ April 14 2006,11:41)
[quote=stevestory,April 14 2006,09:27]does it?

Nope.

If that was the case, Quantum effects did not hapen until about the mid-20th Century.

Gravity did not work before Newton.

And the speed of light only became absolute after Einstein was born.[/quote]
But those aren't examples of no scientific evidence! The evidence was all over, humans just weren't in a position to see it yet.

Lack of comprehension isn't the same as lack of evidence.

I have to disagree there (apart from gravity).

What evidence was there for relativity or QM?

  
C.J.O'Brien



Posts: 395
Joined: Aug. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: April 14 2006,09:25   

Re: relativity, there had long been recognition that the orbit of Mercury was anomalous under Newtonian mechanics.

--------------
The is the beauty of being me- anything that any man does I can understand.
--Joe G

  
Mr_Christopher



Posts: 1238
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: April 14 2006,10:14   

Quote
Actually, after 10 years we still do not have a single, peer reviewed study in any scientific journal that actually has falsified Lee Harvey Oswald was a space alien from a distant galaxy.


--------------
Uncommon Descent is a moral cesspool, a festering intellectual ghetto that intoxicates and degrades its inhabitants - Stephen Matheson

  
Henry J



Posts: 4098
Joined: Mar. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: April 14 2006,10:16   

Re "That coudn't be anything to do with the fact that they keep changing the definition does it?"

Naahhhhhh...

How could one suggest such a thing? ;)

  
Stephen Elliott



Posts: 1754
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: April 14 2006,10:37   

Quote (C.J.O'Brien @ April 14 2006,14:25)
Re: relativity, there had long been recognition that the orbit of Mercury was anomalous under Newtonian mechanics.

Unless another unobserved body had yet to be found.

Anyway, that was hardly evidence for light having a fixed speed and traveling at that speed through space stoped you traveling through time.

  
  17 replies since April 14 2006,04:27 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

    


Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

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