PJ:
Quote:But were not controlling emissions. Plus even if we were we don't know what the temperature would be in the unchecked emssions scenario.
Yes an experiment on a global scale is very limited from a scientific perspective.
Quote:So is evolution. You can do experiments which demonstate natural selection as well as numerous other observations which support the theory. Why isn't this scientific?
Natural selection is a scientific theory.
Ziggy:
Quote:What's the unscientific part? And don't you dare say evolution!
An example is universal common ancestry.
Quote:Notwithstanding, Creationism makes a claim which would falsify evolution. Creationism would maintain that various creatures we see today were there when life came to be on this planet. You asked for falsifiability. This shows that evolution is falsifiable. AND youhave been given a number of other potential falsifiers. If you feel compelled to ask how evolution can be falsified again, just read back.
Falsification by magic etc does not satisfy the scientific requirements for falsifiability. You have to be able to design a repeatable experiment that would disprove it if it were false. Not just dream up an alternative and hold it as proof of your own theory.
Quote:The theory implies that complex life today evolved from simpler life.
The theory makes no claims of directionality of change, with regard to complexity or any other subjective assessment of life.
Quote:What you think is an alternative to the theory of evolution's explanation of how complex life on this planet came to be?
Absense of an alternative does not make it scientific either.
Quote:You don't believe that genetic variation and natural selection brought it about?
I am making claims about science, not belief. Unscientific does not mean wrong. If anything, scientific means wrong.
Quote:You made a false and absurd dichotomy.
It is not false. The dichotomy between the scientific and unscientific aspects is genuine and enlightening.
Muso:
Quote:The first time I've read this particular gem of knowledge. It speaks volumes:
Muso, you are clearly misrepresenting the article by quoting that out of context. It is obviously meant to be put forward as a theory to demonstrate a point, not a fact.
Quote:Evolution does not imply that life spontaneously came about on Earth.
According to my high school biology textbook it does.
Quote:It annoys me that fundamentalists have hijacked our education system with this crap. To me knowledge is sacred, and this kind of thing is sacrilege. Keep life imprisonment for murderers and pedophiles, but maybe we should think about Old Testament justice for these fossils who corrupt our kids. It would be poetic justice.
Sacred cows are the greatest threat to the aquisition of new knowledge.
locutious:
Quote:I agree with everything you said. The Quality education of children is the most important and sacred task we are responsible for along with their physical wellbeing.
It is the reason I'd like to see an end to private education.
By any objective measure private schools offer a better quality education.
Ziggy:
Quote:...... researchers were able to use evolutionary theory to make some testable predictions.
They have doen so many times. Sometimes they were right. Sometimes they were wrong. Where they are right, they claim it proves the theory. Where they are wrong, they simply alter the theory, or discover they don't need to do anything because the theory didn't actually predict it. Evolution as a theory owes it's survival to it's infinite adaptability more than anything else.
Muso:
Quote:In some environments, simpler is better. For example high salinity, the presence of hydrocarbons etc can defeat more complex organisms.
Another example of the 'flexibility' of 'predictions' based on evolution. This is an after the fact explanation that does not stand up to scrutiny.