Evidence & Testing in the Scientific Field (Updated 1/8)

[EsgarBlackpoxs]

Grace etoiledrexl or moon

EsgarBlackpoxs

Grace etoiledrexl or moon

EsgarBlackpoxs

Grace etoiledrexl or moon

no where in there was anything that makes me believe that we are 100% sure

It's not supposed to. Things are supposed to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt

reasonable is an opinion

You're right, but opinion ca n only extend so far. They do not give you carte blanche to spout off whatever you feel like and call it "reasonable".

A reasonable doubt: "How can the big bang be true when we haven't seen any evidence of the universe expanding?" (We've seen it, by the way)

Unreasonable: "HOw can the Big Bang be true when the chocolate monkey sof Equadoria 3.568779 haven't tap danced yet?"

prove the second statement wrong

Well that's easy: I made it up.

In all seriousness, if a scientist actually made that claim, he has several things he must prove:
-Equadoria 3.568779 exists
-There are chocolate monkeys there
-those monekys are alive
-their dance has something to do with the Biog Bang's causation, or lack thereof.


Again, opinions are not Carte Blanche to do whatever you want. There's a reason science has rejected the "earth is flat" theory.

[southerndrawl118]

VoijaRisa

Let's stop feeding the troll everyone.

oh very well

[Grace of light and shadow]

Cuddle-fish

Grace etoiledrexl or moon

Cuddle-fish

Grace etoiledrexl or moon

EsgarBlackpoxs

Grace etoiledrexl or moon

reasonable is an opinion

You're right, but opinion ca n only extend so far. They do not give you carte blanche to spout off whatever you feel like and call it "reasonable".

A reasonable doubt: "How can the big bang be true when we haven't seen any evidence of the universe expanding?" (We've seen it, by the way)

Unreasonable: "HOw can the Big Bang be true when the chocolate monkey sof Equadoria 3.568779 haven't tap danced yet?"

prove the second statement wrong

because youre a troll with the mind of a child. Hows that for evidence?

hey that is your opinion and could very well be possible but the same can be said for you...

hardly....i have a firm grasp on reality ....well..firm enough to understand the concept of repeatable, testable, processes

and i can say your crazy and don't see anything how it really is and neither side is provable and that is as close to a fact as i will go with

[southerndrawl118]

Grace etoiledrexl or moon

Cuddle-fish

Grace etoiledrexl or moon

Cuddle-fish

Grace etoiledrexl or moon

prove the second statement wrong

because youre a troll with the mind of a child. Hows that for evidence?

hey that is your opinion and could very well be possible but the same can be said for you...

hardly....i have a firm grasp on reality ....well..firm enough to understand the concept of repeatable, testable, processes

and i can say your crazy and don't see anything how it really is and neither side is provable and that is as close to a fact as i will go with

no one claism that eithe rside is proavable...as you would know had you read the first post. Of course, one side does have a mountain of evolution while the otherside has baseless claims. Feel free to throw your hat in with which ever you find more believable. And once again, i will refer you to the links i posted

[Grace of light and shadow]

well ignore me all you want but here is my over all point... reality is based on perceptions that could be different in everyone. saying yours has to be right or that it is impossible for this to be is short sited because no one can consider every factor in any situation. a crazy person could see a normal world that doesn't actually exist so we can safely say that we could all be doing the same. i won't debate a logical idea but i will say that it could be wrong. i am leaving now and you can pm if you want but there are too many people here spewing the same thing to deal with. thank you for your time and have a nice evening

[A Lost Iguana]

VoijaRisa

A Lost Iguana

Oo, nice thread. The stats section is a little hand-wavey, though.

It was meant to be. Stats is primarily a mathematical argument (mmm Gaussians....) and most Gaians can barely add.

Too true. I was sceptical when the idea of this thread was first mentioned but you have done a good job with it. If only Gaians had a clue about statistics and testing. Hell, you cannot stress enough the importance of error analysis. Ho hum.

[VoijaRisa]

A Lost Iguana

Too true. I was sceptical when the idea of this thread was first mentioned but you have done a good job with it. If only Gaians had a clue about statistics and testing. Hell, you cannot stress enough the importance of error analysis. Ho hum.

It doesn't take a mathematical argument to show people that no data in science is complete. Having established that, it's clear why the "missing links" argument is nonsense.

[Reluctant Samurai]

This OP kicks more balls than have ever been kicked before. My hat off to you, Voija.

[A Lost Iguana]

VoijaRisa

A Lost Iguana

Too true. I was sceptical when the idea of this thread was first mentioned but you have done a good job with it. If only Gaians had a clue about statistics and testing. Hell, you cannot stress enough the importance of error analysis. Ho hum.

It doesn't take a mathematical argument to show people that no data in science is complete. Having established that, it's clear why the "missing links" argument is nonsense.

Hm. My gripe about stressing data analysis was a more general and not directed at your post: your argument is made well. As an example, I tire of the global warming threads where people love presenting their graphs but have no idea about the associated errors on the data points.

Perhaps it's just my training in that a data point with no determined error is pretty much useless.

[VoijaRisa]

A Lost Iguana

Perhaps it's just my training in that a data point with no determined error is pretty much useless.

I feel pretty much the same way, but even data isn't any more meaningful to the average American even if it does have errors assosciated with it because they can't understand what error is, how it can be compensated for, what sort of error is typical for a particular field, etc....

[Daumier]

VoijaRisa, have I mentioned that you are my hero?

[Ziixxxitria_Coutl]

Thank you for providing a solid, reasonable argument.
While I believe in creationism, there's no reason to think (in my opinion) that evolution, etc... can't coincide, or that tomorrow we could find out that ALL theories and beliefs are wrong.
Huzzah, progression!

:]

[VoijaRisa]

CrewWolf

VoijaRisa, have I mentioned that you are my hero?

Nope.

Ziixxxitria_Coutl

While I believe in creationism, there's no reason to think (in my opinion) that evolution, etc... can't coincide

If you accept evolution and believe that it was god directed, then that's not creationism. Creationism explicitly denies evolution. If you meld the two, that's "Theistic Evolution".

[Redem]

Awesome thread, dude. Pure awesome smile

Took a bit to read through it though, I doubt many of the intended audience will bother, really.

Still a laudible effort, however. heart

[Noying]

thank you VoijaRisa greatly told smile thumbs up on this topic made my hearth a bit lighter from all the strange stuff I read on this forums...