Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Fester Chugabrew
That organized matter operating under predictable laws will be found.

Find some and get back to us. Come up with a specifically-stated hypothesis, set up a reproducible test, have it be successful and submit it to a peer-reviewed journal. If it survives, you have a decent hypothesis. Then you can work on building a general theory to explain it.

Nobody will take you seriously until that's done, because that's how the science game is played. But then you've already come up with the vague, ill-defined "theory," so you'll have to backpedal a bit to overcome that initial loss of credibility.

512 posted on 12/13/2005 7:26:13 AM PST by antiRepublicrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 502 | View Replies ]


To: antiRepublicrat
Find some and get back to us.

The universe is replete with organized matter that behaves according to predictable laws. You need look no farther than the front of your nose at any time. From both an inductive and deductive standpoint, the theory of intelligent design makes sense.

But you, too, must have some other theory to explain the presence of organized matter that behaves under predictable laws. What is it? Evolution? That works, too. There is nothing in the universe that cannot be explained by "natural" causes. Evolution is a legitimate theory, to be sure. But it is not the only one capable of explaining the data.

And if you live under the illusion that science, in order to be science, must omit any notion of God or the supernatural, then you adhere to a dogma of your own. An unscientific practice at best. Bigotry at worst.

515 posted on 12/13/2005 7:36:24 AM PST by Fester Chugabrew
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 512 | View Replies ]

To: antiRepublicrat; Fester Chugabrew
FC: That organized matter operating under predictable laws will be found.

aR: Find some and get back to us. Come up with a specifically-stated hypothesis, set up a reproducible test, have it be successful and submit it to a peer-reviewed journal. If it survives, you have a decent hypothesis. Then you can work on building a general theory to explain it.

Nobody will take you seriously until that's done, because that's how the science game is played. But then you've already come up with the vague, ill-defined "theory," so you'll have to backpedal a bit to overcome that initial loss of credibility.

I think you're being unfair to Fester and his rather elegant theory, "Stuff exists."

And, as I look around ... I see STUFF! Intelligently designed stuff, at that! Hey! Fester may be onto something! "Stuff exists" explains so much. It explains everything, in fact ... uh-oh ...

633 posted on 12/13/2005 11:18:08 AM PST by Gumlegs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 512 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson