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

To: USFRIENDINVICTORIA

"I've tried to make some of the same points on a few of these sorts of threads. Anyone invoking the name of science to make their arguments needs to understand that the scientific method is based on attempts to falsify a theory -- not on an attempt to prove it."

You might be interested in my post #29.

And please explain to me how the "hypothesis" of the naturalistic origin of the first living cell can be "falsified."

No matter how improbable it is calculated to be, the true believers can simply claim that, "given enough time and space, anything can happen."


72 posted on 02/16/2006 10:29:07 PM PST by RussP
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies ]


To: RussP; Ichneumon

"And please explain to me how the "hypothesis" of the naturalistic origin of the first living cell can be "falsified."

I can't explain that -- I claim no expertise in biology, nor theology.

My post #67 was written in support of Ichneumon's #52; and concerned the philosophy of science. As this debate is often framed as "science" versus "superstition" -- it is important that those purporting to speak for "science" don't misrepresent what science actually is.

I believe that, used properly, the scientific method is a powerful tool for discovery. I also acknowledge that there are many things that science cannot tell us (at least not yet).


91 posted on 02/17/2006 9:51:56 AM PST by USFRIENDINVICTORIA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | 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