Non-financial boards have been closed but will continue to be accessible in read-only form. If you're disappointed, we understand. Thank you for being an active participant in this community. We have more community features in development that we look forward to sharing soon.
That's certainly true. With few exceptions (i.e. Behe), most Creationists don't seem to understand the scientific method at all. They repeatedly make arguments they think are "telling" which are nothing of the sort, they're part of how science works.* The theory has changed!No ****, Sherlock. Science is always about revising and refining theories. If it was a static, revealed truth, it'd be religion.* You're arguing among yourselves!This is the point that Nigel just made, but it bears repeating. Discussion of alternatives is part of the method.* Scientist who accept Creationism are ostracized. It's suppression of free speech.I know you think that just because the scientific method includes discussion of alternatives, any crackpot idea can be brought in to the mix, but that's not how it works. You have to have evidence, and you have to test it, or it gets thrown out. Yours got thrown out a long time ago, for good reason. Repeating a discredited idea without new evidence may be free speech, but it's not science. You can be expected to be treated like an idiot for doing it. - Gus
Best Of |
Favorites & Replies |
Start a New Board |
My Fool |