Skip to comments.Scientific heresy
Posted on 11/02/2011 2:47:29 PM PDT by ventanax5
It is a great honour to be asked to deliver the Angus Millar lecture.
I have no idea whether Angus Millar ever saw himself as a heretic, but I have a soft spot for heresy. One of my ancestral relations, Nicholas Ridley* the Oxford martyr, was burned at the stake for heresy.
My topic today is scientific heresy. When are scientific heretics right and when are they mad? How do you tell the difference between science and pseudoscience?
Let us run through some issues, starting with the easy ones.
Astronomy is a science; astrology is a pseudoscience.
Evolution is science; creationism is pseudoscience.
Molecular biology is science; homeopathy is pseudoscience.
Vaccination is science; the MMR scare is pseudoscience.
Oxygen is science; phlogiston was pseudoscience.
Chemistry is science; alchemy was pseudoscience.
Are you with me so far?
(Excerpt) Read more at bishop-hill.net ...
That was a superb posting. I’ve long known that both the math and physics were suspect, and was fascinated to see how many of the “researchers” manipulated data.
However, this lecture was most certainly one of the best presentations of what science is (and isn’t) that I’ve seen.
No...sorry Matt. I’m not “with you”.
1Ti 6:20 O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane [and] vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called:
Tell me, how did Daniel predict the future before it happened in Neb’s dream? (Daniel 2)
A. A fraud, the bible was written by the world’s greatest collection of historians - who managed to remain anonymous...
B. It really IS God’s word.
Believing A is a far greater stretch than B...imo...still, your pick.
Agreed. It was excellent, but all kudos should be directed to ventanax5 who found/posted it.