One more time, as you seem to never address your very basic mistake regarding science and the scientific method (other than more creepypasta and putting your finger in your ears):
Quote:
Misconceptions about science
Many students have misconceptions about what science is and how it works. This section explains and corrects some of the most common misconceptions that students are likely have trouble with. If you are interested in common misconceptions about teaching the nature and process of science, visit our page on that topic.
Quote:
MISCONCEPTION: Experiments are a necessary part of the scientific process. Without an experiment, a study is not rigorous or scientific.
CORRECTION: Perhaps because the Scientific Method and popular portrayals of science emphasize experiments, many people think that science can't be done without an experiment. In fact, there are many ways to test almost any scientific idea; experimentation is only one approach. Some ideas are best tested by setting up a controlled experiment in a lab, some by making detailed observations of the natural world, and some with a combination of strategies. To study detailed examples of how scientific ideas can be tested fairly, with and without experiments, check out our side trip Fair tests: A do-it-yourself guide.
Berkeley, eh? lol They say that so the can stupidly push there little UN-TESTABLE "Just So" Story fairytale evolution to the willfully ignorant masses
This ends it...
"It doesn't matter how beautiful your theory is, it doesn't matter how smart you are. If it doesn't agree with experiment, it's wrong."
Richard P. Feynman PhD (Nobel laureate Physics)
Is there something here that Dr Feynman said that is particularly confusing?
What do you suppose he would say to a "Postulate" with ZERO EXPERIMENTS!!!!
And by the mere fact I would even have to post this "ONCE" is testimony to your 13th Century Alchemy education and adherence to Incoherent Fairytales.
Science without Experiments is like Water without Hydrogen. Preposterous Absurdity is insulting to Preposterous Absurdity.
Sir I can safely say that you (and the vast majority of people on this thread), and Berkeley..... wouldn't know what "Science" was if it landed on your head and whistled dixie.
regards
If Feynman agreed with your extrapolation of his statement, he would have said so, but he did not.
What extrapolation might that be, pray tell...?
Does not agree with experimentation extrapolated to no experimentation.
RE: RE: Do us a favor and go back to your enlightened Â
That this piece of shit truther has deluded himself into believing he is critical thinker. Young Earth Creationists may be among the most virulently stupid people on the planet - an embarrassment to the rest of society.
Spock ought to blow Eric as part of his apology for bringing him here....certainly won't be the first time Spock has had a cock in his mouth.
"It doesn't matter how beautiful your theory is, it doesn't matter how smart you are. If it doesn't agree with experiment, it's wrong."
Richard P. Feynman PhD (Nobel laureate Physics)
Is there something here that Dr Feynman said that is particularly confusing?
Obviously it has confused you. His statement is true. All he is talking about is a theory that is disproved by an experiment.
He is not saying anything about whether or not an experiment is a necessary part of a valid scientific theory.
Good try, though. Although I think my 9yr old would have needed less help understanding these things.
And of course the obvious- how can that statement even relate to evolution in your view? You've been creepypasting for the last two days about how you can't create an experiment for evolution, therefore it's not science. But then to support that claim you post a quote saying that if a theory doesn't agree with the experiment (not even possible for evolution according to you), that the theory is not valid....
I'm not sure what hurts my brain more: the dumb shit that you post, or that you actually believe the dumb shit that you post.
Can you have a coherent conversation in your owns words without falling into the fallacy ( ad per your own post) of citing clips without context from other people whose credentials you think infer credence to your perspective?
Can you make the standard high school essay of five to seven paragraphs ( one states your thesis. Three to five support it. One summarizes it). The shorter the better. No citation or quotes. In your own words and not borrowed from any previous thing on the Internet or a text.
That should be easy and it is on every upper half college entrance application.
Rob in CT/NYC : 2:07 pm : link : reply
And this is how he spends his time. Why not just buy a gun and blow your brains out if this is the rest of your life - being a colossally ignorant douche.
people. It is like walking into a train station and finding a bar fight.
having been away, it's just; ......listen to yourselves, the bitterness and anger, holy moly.
and this is from someone (me) who does not question the science unless its refuted according to scientific method, and, to be honest not having a fucking clue about the details of all this.
aaaaand , I have to say I will probably find a cool and scientifically legit book on genetics, evolution and the origin of life to read after seeing this thread,
One more time, as you seem to never address your very basic mistake regarding science and the scientific method (other than more creepypasta and putting your finger in your ears):
Quote:
Misconceptions about science
Many students have misconceptions about what science is and how it works. This section explains and corrects some of the most common misconceptions that students are likely have trouble with. If you are interested in common misconceptions about teaching the nature and process of science, visit our page on that topic.
Quote:
MISCONCEPTION: Experiments are a necessary part of the scientific process. Without an experiment, a study is not rigorous or scientific.
CORRECTION: Perhaps because the Scientific Method and popular portrayals of science emphasize experiments, many people think that science can't be done without an experiment. In fact, there are many ways to test almost any scientific idea; experimentation is only one approach. Some ideas are best tested by setting up a controlled experiment in a lab, some by making detailed observations of the natural world, and some with a combination of strategies. To study detailed examples of how scientific ideas can be tested fairly, with and without experiments, check out our side trip Fair tests: A do-it-yourself guide.
Berkeley, eh? lol They say that so the can stupidly push there little UN-TESTABLE "Just So" Story fairytale evolution to the willfully ignorant masses
This ends it...
"It doesn't matter how beautiful your theory is, it doesn't matter how smart you are. If it doesn't agree with experiment, it's wrong."
Richard P. Feynman PhD (Nobel laureate Physics)
Is there something here that Dr Feynman said that is particularly confusing?
What do you suppose he would say to a "Postulate" with ZERO EXPERIMENTS!!!!
And by the mere fact I would even have to post this "ONCE" is testimony to your 13th Century Alchemy education and adherence to Incoherent Fairytales.
Science without Experiments is like Water without Hydrogen. Preposterous Absurdity is insulting to Preposterous Absurdity.
Sir I can safely say that you (and the vast majority of people on this thread), and Berkeley..... wouldn't know what "Science" was if it landed on your head and whistled dixie.
regards
If Feynman agreed with your extrapolation of his statement, he would have said so, but he did not.
What extrapolation might that be, pray tell...?
Does not agree with experimentation extrapolated to no experimentation.
Absolutely Stupefying!
Real slow ok.... he said if "it" (That's the Hypothesis) doesn't agree with experiment it's wrong.
Well if you don't have an "EXPERIMENT"/TEST.... it's still a Hypothesis and will forever be one until it is TESTED!
If it can't BE TESTED as in "HYPOTHESIS TESTING" (ahh "Science") it means it's not a VALID HYPOTHESIS; Ergo.....NOT SCIENCE.
Next block of Instruction: How to make a sandwich.
but hey, I love knowing that there are at least SOME people who reject current thinking, even though, on this subject, I do not...so far...:
here are some quotes for the thread:
“It's weird not to be weird.”
― John Lennon
“It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society.”
― Jiddu Krishnamurti
“Any fool can make a rule
And any fool will mind it.”
― Henry David Thoreau, Journal #14
“Rebel children, I urge you, fight the turgid slick of conformity with which they seek to smother your glory.”
― Russell Brand
“He who joyfully marches to music rank and file has already earned my contempt. He has been given a large brain by mistake, since for him the spinal cord would surely suffice.”
― Albert Einstein
people. It is like walking into a train station and finding a bar fight.
having been away, it's just; ......listen to yourselves, the bitterness and anger, holy moly.
and this is from someone (me) who does not question the science unless its refuted according to scientific method, and, to be honest not having a fucking clue about the details of all this.
aaaaand , I have to say I will probably find a cool and scientifically legit book on genetics, evolution and the origin of life to read after seeing this thread,
"It doesn't matter how beautiful your theory is, it doesn't matter how smart you are. If it doesn't agree with experiment, it's wrong."
Richard P. Feynman PhD (Nobel laureate Physics)
Is there something here that Dr Feynman said that is particularly confusing?
Obviously it has confused you. His statement is true. All he is talking about is a theory that is disproved by an experiment.
He is not saying anything about whether or not an experiment is a necessary part of a valid scientific theory.
Good try, though. Although I think my 9yr old would have needed less help understanding these things.
And of course the obvious- how can that statement even relate to evolution in your view? You've been creepypasting for the last two days about how you can't create an experiment for evolution, therefore it's not science. But then to support that claim you post a quote saying that if a theory doesn't agree with the experiment (not even possible for evolution according to you), that the theory is not valid....
I'm not sure what hurts my brain more: the dumb shit that you post, or that you actually believe the dumb shit that you post.
My word people.
Quote:
...for the last two days about how you can't create an experiment for evolution, therefore it's not science.
Well, somewhat correct. You can't get to a Hypothesis because you can't get passed the 1st Step of the Scientific Method.... You know, the thing that makes science, "Science".
Then this...
Quote:
But then to support that claim you post a quote saying that if a theory doesn't agree with the experiment (not even possible for evolution according to you), that the theory is not valid
Do you have a point here or do I need an abacus?
That's because "evolution" is not even a theory or scientific (SEE: First Post).
And that's not what Dr.Feynman said, he said if the Hypothesis doesn't AGREE with Experiment it's "Wrong".
Can you tell me how you can VALIDATE any aspect of the "theory" of evolution without a Valid Hypothesis....so you can TEST/EXPERIMENT it?
Call Berkeley
regards
It is funny that Enoch is still allowed to be here: Â
He admitted he wasn't a Giants fan.
He was told to come here by spock (who should also be given the heave ho for convincing a troll to come here and troll) to troll.
And he isn't here for Giants football--he's here to be an asshole troll.
When an outed Anti-Semite's recruited bulldog is a Sandy Hook truther, the conversation being in the gutter is actually a step above where those two normally reside.
One more time, as you seem to never address your very basic mistake regarding science and the scientific method (other than more creepypasta and putting your finger in your ears):
Quote:
Misconceptions about science
Many students have misconceptions about what science is and how it works. This section explains and corrects some of the most common misconceptions that students are likely have trouble with. If you are interested in common misconceptions about teaching the nature and process of science, visit our page on that topic.
Quote:
MISCONCEPTION: Experiments are a necessary part of the scientific process. Without an experiment, a study is not rigorous or scientific.
CORRECTION: Perhaps because the Scientific Method and popular portrayals of science emphasize experiments, many people think that science can't be done without an experiment. In fact, there are many ways to test almost any scientific idea; experimentation is only one approach. Some ideas are best tested by setting up a controlled experiment in a lab, some by making detailed observations of the natural world, and some with a combination of strategies. To study detailed examples of how scientific ideas can be tested fairly, with and without experiments, check out our side trip Fair tests: A do-it-yourself guide.
Berkeley, eh? lol They say that so the can stupidly push there little UN-TESTABLE "Just So" Story fairytale evolution to the willfully ignorant masses
This ends it...
"It doesn't matter how beautiful your theory is, it doesn't matter how smart you are. If it doesn't agree with experiment, it's wrong."
Richard P. Feynman PhD (Nobel laureate Physics)
Is there something here that Dr Feynman said that is particularly confusing?
What do you suppose he would say to a "Postulate" with ZERO EXPERIMENTS!!!!
And by the mere fact I would even have to post this "ONCE" is testimony to your 13th Century Alchemy education and adherence to Incoherent Fairytales.
Science without Experiments is like Water without Hydrogen. Preposterous Absurdity is insulting to Preposterous Absurdity.
Sir I can safely say that you (and the vast majority of people on this thread), and Berkeley..... wouldn't know what "Science" was if it landed on your head and whistled dixie.
regards
If Feynman agreed with your extrapolation of his statement, he would have said so, but he did not.
What extrapolation might that be, pray tell...?
Does not agree with experimentation extrapolated to no experimentation.
Absolutely Stupefying!
Real slow ok.... he said if "it" (That's the Hypothesis) doesn't agree with experiment it's wrong.
Well if you don't have an "EXPERIMENT"/TEST.... it's still a Hypothesis and will forever be one until it is TESTED!
If it can't BE TESTED as in "HYPOTHESIS TESTING" (ahh "Science") it means it's not a VALID HYPOTHESIS; Ergo.....NOT SCIENCE.
Next block of Instruction: How to make a sandwich.
He admitted he wasn't a Giants fan.
He was told to come here by spock (who should also be given the heave ho for convincing a troll to come here and troll) to troll.
And he isn't here for Giants football--he's here to be an asshole troll.
Ahh...same old, same old at BBI.
But he's tolerated here, as in not banned, even though this is a nest of vipers. This matched against what happened to the poster who made a lighthearted joke on old Enoch's home base. I ask you, who is tolerant and who is not?
I would support another thread- JUST on the science of this...there may have been some sciency tit for tat above- (which new thread I will not post on since I know so little) that the thread OP will self delete if it goes off the rails.
rather than all the juvenile name calling
I'm going to go out on a limb and say that if this is Â
Your idea of critical thinking, I can just imagine what kind of a shitty service member you were. Military tries hard to breed the stupid out of you, but some do fall through the cracks, and you, Enoch, fell through the crack if you made it to 20 years. I blame your commanders for failing you and the rest of us.
I would support another thread- JUST on the science of this...there may have been some sciency tit for tat above- (which new thread I will not post on since I know so little) that the thread OP will self delete if it goes off the rails.
rather than all the juvenile name calling
Eh...good on you for your moral high ground. I would suggest you depart this thread if it bothers you so much. Or do you just like to see your typing as some kind of an indication of your civility? Because honestly, no one cares.
That and the fact that he rejected wikipedia as a source earlier - I assume senility is preventing him from being logically consistent, even on just one thread.
ronnie, lest we forget that free speech in the public square Â
is the why of your how, please re-read this post and let me remind you to respect your elders, son.
headhunter haha, 'evolved,' I see what you did there
idiotsavant : 3:39 pm : link : reply
but hey, I love knowing that there are at least SOME people who reject current thinking, even though, on this subject, I do not...so far...:
here are some quotes for the thread:
“It's weird not to be weird.”
― John Lennon
“It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society.”
― Jiddu Krishnamurti
“Any fool can make a rule
And any fool will mind it.”
― Henry David Thoreau, Journal #14
“Rebel children, I urge you, fight the turgid slick of conformity with which they seek to smother your glory.”
― Russell Brand
“He who joyfully marches to music rank and file has already earned my contempt. He has been given a large brain by mistake, since for him the spinal cord would surely suffice.”
― Albert Einstein
umm, the rest of the forum is getting pretty boring for those of us who don't like to bicker. can ya'll post some fun shit out there for me to look at? thanks.
Yes, it is generally open to the public, but that openness is at the whim of Eric since it's his website.
Free speech arguments are only relevant when it's a government attempting to suppress speech.
Never mind the fact that Ronnie wasn't attempting to suppress your speech at all -- merely suggesting that if you don't care for the tone of the conversation (which by suggesting that the tone is unpalpapable and that it should cease, you become a hypocrite) you need not read nor post.
Yes, it is generally open to the public, but that openness is at the whim of Eric since it's his website.
Free speech arguments are only relevant when it's a government attempting to suppress speech.
Never mind the fact that Ronnie wasn't attempting to suppress your speech at all -- merely suggesting that if you don't care for the tone of the conversation (which by suggesting that the tone is unpalpapable and that it should cease, you become a hypocrite) you need not read nor post.
In other words, point your high horse in the opposite direction and ride on.
Lets call it the so-far available most consistently sound and data filled explanation of a lot of directly observable and tangible phenomenon . Not every phenomenon. moment of life is not in evolution...its a different phenomenon
Now what?
Please now come up with with a more consistently sound and data filled explanation of a lot of directly observable and tangible phenomenon?
Enoch, here's a simple little experiment to test evolution.
Hypothesis: If evolution is true, the fossil record should match the geological strata (eg. older fossils in older strata)
Experiment: Dig up thousands of fossils from around the world in different strata. See if older strata contain more recently evolved species (eg. there should only be mammals in newer strata).
Quote:
In comment 12143444 Enoch2021 said:
Quote:
In comment 12143386 Cam in MO said:
Quote:
One more time, as you seem to never address your very basic mistake regarding science and the scientific method (other than more creepypasta and putting your finger in your ears):
Quote:
Misconceptions about science
Many students have misconceptions about what science is and how it works. This section explains and corrects some of the most common misconceptions that students are likely have trouble with. If you are interested in common misconceptions about teaching the nature and process of science, visit our page on that topic.
Quote:
MISCONCEPTION: Experiments are a necessary part of the scientific process. Without an experiment, a study is not rigorous or scientific.
CORRECTION: Perhaps because the Scientific Method and popular portrayals of science emphasize experiments, many people think that science can't be done without an experiment. In fact, there are many ways to test almost any scientific idea; experimentation is only one approach. Some ideas are best tested by setting up a controlled experiment in a lab, some by making detailed observations of the natural world, and some with a combination of strategies. To study detailed examples of how scientific ideas can be tested fairly, with and without experiments, check out our side trip Fair tests: A do-it-yourself guide.
Berkeley, eh? lol They say that so the can stupidly push there little UN-TESTABLE "Just So" Story fairytale evolution to the willfully ignorant masses
This ends it...
"It doesn't matter how beautiful your theory is, it doesn't matter how smart you are. If it doesn't agree with experiment, it's wrong."
Richard P. Feynman PhD (Nobel laureate Physics)
Is there something here that Dr Feynman said that is particularly confusing?
What do you suppose he would say to a "Postulate" with ZERO EXPERIMENTS!!!!
And by the mere fact I would even have to post this "ONCE" is testimony to your 13th Century Alchemy education and adherence to Incoherent Fairytales.
Science without Experiments is like Water without Hydrogen. Preposterous Absurdity is insulting to Preposterous Absurdity.
Sir I can safely say that you (and the vast majority of people on this thread), and Berkeley..... wouldn't know what "Science" was if it landed on your head and whistled dixie.
regards
If Feynman agreed with your extrapolation of his statement, he would have said so, but he did not.
What extrapolation might that be, pray tell...?
Quote:
wants a truther. No one wants a Creationist "scientist".
Thanks for the No True Scotsman (Fallacy).
Do you have anymore logical fallacies to support your arguments?
Quote:
We are all glad that you are retired, largely for the fact that you can't influence anyone, though it's not the only reason.
Thanks for you Baseless "Opinion" (Fallacy)
PROTIP: Fallacies....are Fallacious.
regards
Yeah. I hope you meet some of the unfortunate victims of Sandy Hook, and give them your thoughts on it.
Spock ought to blow Eric as part of his apology for bringing him here....certainly won't be the first time Spock has had a cock in his mouth.
Quote:
"It doesn't matter how beautiful your theory is, it doesn't matter how smart you are. If it doesn't agree with experiment, it's wrong."
Richard P. Feynman PhD (Nobel laureate Physics)
Is there something here that Dr Feynman said that is particularly confusing?
Obviously it has confused you. His statement is true. All he is talking about is a theory that is disproved by an experiment.
He is not saying anything about whether or not an experiment is a necessary part of a valid scientific theory.
Good try, though. Although I think my 9yr old would have needed less help understanding these things.
And of course the obvious- how can that statement even relate to evolution in your view? You've been creepypasting for the last two days about how you can't create an experiment for evolution, therefore it's not science. But then to support that claim you post a quote saying that if a theory doesn't agree with the experiment (not even possible for evolution according to you), that the theory is not valid....
I'm not sure what hurts my brain more: the dumb shit that you post, or that you actually believe the dumb shit that you post.
Mr. Bungle : 2/17/2015 8:26 pm : link : reply
PIZZA FOR EVERYBODY!!!
some of the comments just above, really failing the whole civility test
Damn, what a milestone.
OK,OK...I just need everyone's full name and address, so I know where to send the pizza.
Can you make the standard high school essay of five to seven paragraphs ( one states your thesis. Three to five support it. One summarizes it). The shorter the better. No citation or quotes. In your own words and not borrowed from any previous thing on the Internet or a text.
That should be easy and it is on every upper half college entrance application.
And this is how he spends his time. Why not just buy a gun and blow your brains out if this is the rest of your life - being a colossally ignorant douche.
To where they are now:
Pizza that is.
having been away, it's just; ......listen to yourselves, the bitterness and anger, holy moly.
and this is from someone (me) who does not question the science unless its refuted according to scientific method, and, to be honest not having a fucking clue about the details of all this.
aaaaand , I have to say I will probably find a cool and scientifically legit book on genetics, evolution and the origin of life to read after seeing this thread,
But the TONE here has gone a bit into the gutter.
Quote:
In comment 12143467 Big Al said:
Quote:
In comment 12143444 Enoch2021 said:
Quote:
In comment 12143386 Cam in MO said:
Quote:
One more time, as you seem to never address your very basic mistake regarding science and the scientific method (other than more creepypasta and putting your finger in your ears):
Quote:
Misconceptions about science
Many students have misconceptions about what science is and how it works. This section explains and corrects some of the most common misconceptions that students are likely have trouble with. If you are interested in common misconceptions about teaching the nature and process of science, visit our page on that topic.
Quote:
MISCONCEPTION: Experiments are a necessary part of the scientific process. Without an experiment, a study is not rigorous or scientific.
CORRECTION: Perhaps because the Scientific Method and popular portrayals of science emphasize experiments, many people think that science can't be done without an experiment. In fact, there are many ways to test almost any scientific idea; experimentation is only one approach. Some ideas are best tested by setting up a controlled experiment in a lab, some by making detailed observations of the natural world, and some with a combination of strategies. To study detailed examples of how scientific ideas can be tested fairly, with and without experiments, check out our side trip Fair tests: A do-it-yourself guide.
Berkeley, eh? lol They say that so the can stupidly push there little UN-TESTABLE "Just So" Story fairytale evolution to the willfully ignorant masses
This ends it...
"It doesn't matter how beautiful your theory is, it doesn't matter how smart you are. If it doesn't agree with experiment, it's wrong."
Richard P. Feynman PhD (Nobel laureate Physics)
Is there something here that Dr Feynman said that is particularly confusing?
What do you suppose he would say to a "Postulate" with ZERO EXPERIMENTS!!!!
And by the mere fact I would even have to post this "ONCE" is testimony to your 13th Century Alchemy education and adherence to Incoherent Fairytales.
Science without Experiments is like Water without Hydrogen. Preposterous Absurdity is insulting to Preposterous Absurdity.
Sir I can safely say that you (and the vast majority of people on this thread), and Berkeley..... wouldn't know what "Science" was if it landed on your head and whistled dixie.
regards
If Feynman agreed with your extrapolation of his statement, he would have said so, but he did not.
What extrapolation might that be, pray tell...?
Does not agree with experimentation extrapolated to no experimentation.
Absolutely Stupefying!
Real slow ok.... he said if "it" (That's the Hypothesis) doesn't agree with experiment it's wrong.
Well if you don't have an "EXPERIMENT"/TEST.... it's still a Hypothesis and will forever be one until it is TESTED!
If it can't BE TESTED as in "HYPOTHESIS TESTING" (ahh "Science") it means it's not a VALID HYPOTHESIS; Ergo.....NOT SCIENCE.
Next block of Instruction: How to make a sandwich.
regards
That damn little inconvenience...
8, 7, 5, 10, 12, 2.
The hypothesis is that the values don't follow a linear trend. Enoch's contention is that there is no way to test this.
Such utter stupidity. Minor statistical tests are widely available. Perhaps you even learned about a student's t-test in high school?
here are some quotes for the thread:
“It's weird not to be weird.”
― John Lennon
“It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society.”
― Jiddu Krishnamurti
“Any fool can make a rule
And any fool will mind it.”
― Henry David Thoreau, Journal #14
“Rebel children, I urge you, fight the turgid slick of conformity with which they seek to smother your glory.”
― Russell Brand
“He who joyfully marches to music rank and file has already earned my contempt. He has been given a large brain by mistake, since for him the spinal cord would surely suffice.”
― Albert Einstein
-goodreads.com-
having been away, it's just; ......listen to yourselves, the bitterness and anger, holy moly.
and this is from someone (me) who does not question the science unless its refuted according to scientific method, and, to be honest not having a fucking clue about the details of all this.
aaaaand , I have to say I will probably find a cool and scientifically legit book on genetics, evolution and the origin of life to read after seeing this thread,
But the TONE here has gone a bit into the gutter.
And so you're here because?
Quote:
Quote:
"It doesn't matter how beautiful your theory is, it doesn't matter how smart you are. If it doesn't agree with experiment, it's wrong."
Richard P. Feynman PhD (Nobel laureate Physics)
Is there something here that Dr Feynman said that is particularly confusing?
Obviously it has confused you. His statement is true. All he is talking about is a theory that is disproved by an experiment.
He is not saying anything about whether or not an experiment is a necessary part of a valid scientific theory.
Good try, though. Although I think my 9yr old would have needed less help understanding these things.
And of course the obvious- how can that statement even relate to evolution in your view? You've been creepypasting for the last two days about how you can't create an experiment for evolution, therefore it's not science. But then to support that claim you post a quote saying that if a theory doesn't agree with the experiment (not even possible for evolution according to you), that the theory is not valid....
I'm not sure what hurts my brain more: the dumb shit that you post, or that you actually believe the dumb shit that you post.
My word people.
Well, somewhat correct. You can't get to a Hypothesis because you can't get passed the 1st Step of the Scientific Method.... You know, the thing that makes science, "Science".
Then this...
Do you have a point here or do I need an abacus?
That's because "evolution" is not even a theory or scientific (SEE: First Post).
And that's not what Dr.Feynman said, he said if the Hypothesis doesn't AGREE with Experiment it's "Wrong".
Can you tell me how you can VALIDATE any aspect of the "theory" of evolution without a Valid Hypothesis....so you can TEST/EXPERIMENT it?
Call Berkeley
regards
He was told to come here by spock (who should also be given the heave ho for convincing a troll to come here and troll) to troll.
And he isn't here for Giants football--he's here to be an asshole troll.
Ahh...same old, same old at BBI.
When an outed Anti-Semite's recruited bulldog is a Sandy Hook truther, the conversation being in the gutter is actually a step above where those two normally reside.
Quote:
In comment 12143504 Enoch2021 said:
Quote:
In comment 12143467 Big Al said:
Quote:
In comment 12143444 Enoch2021 said:
Quote:
In comment 12143386 Cam in MO said:
Quote:
One more time, as you seem to never address your very basic mistake regarding science and the scientific method (other than more creepypasta and putting your finger in your ears):
Quote:
Misconceptions about science
Many students have misconceptions about what science is and how it works. This section explains and corrects some of the most common misconceptions that students are likely have trouble with. If you are interested in common misconceptions about teaching the nature and process of science, visit our page on that topic.
Quote:
MISCONCEPTION: Experiments are a necessary part of the scientific process. Without an experiment, a study is not rigorous or scientific.
CORRECTION: Perhaps because the Scientific Method and popular portrayals of science emphasize experiments, many people think that science can't be done without an experiment. In fact, there are many ways to test almost any scientific idea; experimentation is only one approach. Some ideas are best tested by setting up a controlled experiment in a lab, some by making detailed observations of the natural world, and some with a combination of strategies. To study detailed examples of how scientific ideas can be tested fairly, with and without experiments, check out our side trip Fair tests: A do-it-yourself guide.
Berkeley, eh? lol They say that so the can stupidly push there little UN-TESTABLE "Just So" Story fairytale evolution to the willfully ignorant masses
This ends it...
"It doesn't matter how beautiful your theory is, it doesn't matter how smart you are. If it doesn't agree with experiment, it's wrong."
Richard P. Feynman PhD (Nobel laureate Physics)
Is there something here that Dr Feynman said that is particularly confusing?
What do you suppose he would say to a "Postulate" with ZERO EXPERIMENTS!!!!
And by the mere fact I would even have to post this "ONCE" is testimony to your 13th Century Alchemy education and adherence to Incoherent Fairytales.
Science without Experiments is like Water without Hydrogen. Preposterous Absurdity is insulting to Preposterous Absurdity.
Sir I can safely say that you (and the vast majority of people on this thread), and Berkeley..... wouldn't know what "Science" was if it landed on your head and whistled dixie.
regards
If Feynman agreed with your extrapolation of his statement, he would have said so, but he did not.
What extrapolation might that be, pray tell...?
Does not agree with experimentation extrapolated to no experimentation.
Absolutely Stupefying!
Real slow ok.... he said if "it" (That's the Hypothesis) doesn't agree with experiment it's wrong.
Well if you don't have an "EXPERIMENT"/TEST.... it's still a Hypothesis and will forever be one until it is TESTED!
If it can't BE TESTED as in "HYPOTHESIS TESTING" (ahh "Science") it means it's not a VALID HYPOTHESIS; Ergo.....NOT SCIENCE.
Next block of Instruction: How to make a sandwich.
regards
He was told to come here by spock (who should also be given the heave ho for convincing a troll to come here and troll) to troll.
And he isn't here for Giants football--he's here to be an asshole troll.
Ahh...same old, same old at BBI.
But he's tolerated here, as in not banned, even though this is a nest of vipers. This matched against what happened to the poster who made a lighthearted joke on old Enoch's home base. I ask you, who is tolerant and who is not?
rather than all the juvenile name calling
rather than all the juvenile name calling
Eh...good on you for your moral high ground. I would suggest you depart this thread if it bothers you so much. Or do you just like to see your typing as some kind of an indication of your civility? Because honestly, no one cares.
That damn little inconvenience
Non Sequitur (Fallacy).
"Scientists then test hypotheses by conducting experiments".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method
It's tantamount to saying: Except Hydrogen is not needed to form H2O.
that damn little inconvenience
regards
What a non-sequitur logical fallacy is.
What a non-sequitur logical fallacy is.
That and the fact that he rejected wikipedia as a source earlier - I assume senility is preventing him from being logically consistent, even on just one thread.
headhunter haha, 'evolved,' I see what you did there
idiotsavant : 3:39 pm : link : reply
but hey, I love knowing that there are at least SOME people who reject current thinking, even though, on this subject, I do not...so far...:
here are some quotes for the thread:
“It's weird not to be weird.”
― John Lennon
“It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society.”
― Jiddu Krishnamurti
“Any fool can make a rule
And any fool will mind it.”
― Henry David Thoreau, Journal #14
“Rebel children, I urge you, fight the turgid slick of conformity with which they seek to smother your glory.”
― Russell Brand
“He who joyfully marches to music rank and file has already earned my contempt. He has been given a large brain by mistake, since for him the spinal cord would surely suffice.”
― Albert Einstein
-goodreads.com-
Fallacy
Test
Experiment
Software
Code
And
Regards
This is fun
There you have it.
Come on. This is the thread that keeps giving in a slow off season time.
This is a semi-private space.
Yes, it is generally open to the public, but that openness is at the whim of Eric since it's his website.
Free speech arguments are only relevant when it's a government attempting to suppress speech.
Never mind the fact that Ronnie wasn't attempting to suppress your speech at all -- merely suggesting that if you don't care for the tone of the conversation (which by suggesting that the tone is unpalpapable and that it should cease, you become a hypocrite) you need not read nor post.
This is a semi-private space.
Yes, it is generally open to the public, but that openness is at the whim of Eric since it's his website.
Free speech arguments are only relevant when it's a government attempting to suppress speech.
Never mind the fact that Ronnie wasn't attempting to suppress your speech at all -- merely suggesting that if you don't care for the tone of the conversation (which by suggesting that the tone is unpalpapable and that it should cease, you become a hypocrite) you need not read nor post.
In other words, point your high horse in the opposite direction and ride on.
Lets call it the so-far available most consistently sound and data filled explanation of a lot of directly observable and tangible phenomenon . Not every phenomenon. moment of life is not in evolution...its a different phenomenon
Now what?
Please now come up with with a more consistently sound and data filled explanation of a lot of directly observable and tangible phenomenon?
Thanks
Hypothesis: If evolution is true, the fossil record should match the geological strata (eg. older fossils in older strata)
Experiment: Dig up thousands of fossils from around the world in different strata. See if older strata contain more recently evolved species (eg. there should only be mammals in newer strata).
Repeat.
Was that so hard?