Science Vs Theology

I begin this thread with a response to a post made off topic and in a forum where the topic isn't particularly appropriate.

@BlueSkyKing

Science is a method that is applied to nature.

How is it applied to nature, is it infallible, and does the method work with the supernatural?

Which has an annoying habit of working.

Conjectural. It also has an "annoying habit" of not working.

To call something a legitimate theory, it mean models can be designed and tested. Can’t design any? Then you don’t have a theory, just wishful thinking and speculation.

Then a model designed is wishful thinking and speculation and the test is fallible, possibly biased to appeal to dogmatic peer review, corrupted due to conflict of interest, especially resulting from funding, possibly misrepresented through publishing? What you have to understand about my approach is that I see great potential in science just as I do theology but I'm also very skeptical of both due to their obvious weaknesses.

So, when you talk to me I can give you stunning examples of those weakness in theology. Can you give the same for science? Because I can see them in science. I don't hear those sort of discussions from science enthusiasts. In fact less than I hear them in enthusiasts of theology. Keeping in mind the important distinction between "science" and "theology" and their respective enthusiasts.

Evolution has evidence that’s equal to gravity being factual.

Factual? Can the factual correct itself? Is science self correcting? Evidence? The available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid.

This evidence is detectable, measurable, observable, testable, and falsifiable. Yeah, that’s a lot of -ables.

And the detection, measuring, observation, testing and falsifiability are infallible?

Models have been made and the results show evolution is true.

What, then, is evolution? Change? Like climate change?

This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »

BlueSkyKing · M

How is it applied to nature, is it infallible, and does the method work with the supernatural?

Nature as in things made of matter. Science is methodology. Far from being infallible but it’s the best we have. If there is equally valid alternative method, name it. Does the "supernatural" claim have evidence that can be detected, measured, and tested? Supernatural doesn’t necessarily mean unnatural.

Conjectural. It also has an "annoying habit" of not working

Agree. "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof." I recall the "cold fusion" debacle decades ago.

Factual? Can the factual correct itself? Is science self correcting? Evidence? The available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid

Scientists strive for a 95% threshold before stating something is a fact. When they peer publish, a target is painted on their backs. Lots of other scientists are out to shoot down the results. A big attribute is the self correcting. When better evidence is presented, the old is discarded. Carl Sagan thought the atmosphere of Venus was water vapor. But it turned out differently when the probes got there.

Other people here can explain evolution a lot better than me. You may want to checkout the longest evolution experiment still running.

[media=https://youtu.be/w4sLAQvEH-M]

ElwoodBlues · M

@BlueSkyKing

Scientists strive for a 95% threshold before stating something is a fact.

True, that's the threshold for publication in social science; equivalent to two standard deviations.

In physics, the threshold for publication is FIVE standard deviations (they call it the 5σ rule). Five sigmas means that a collection of measurements has less than a 1 in a million chance of having occurred by random variations (99.99994% confidence) - much stricter than the social science rule.

BlueSkyKing · M

It should be noted that in SW evolution doesn’t belong in the Religion & Spirituality category. It’s an established science that belongs in that category. I informed this to the administrator and he said it’s because of the conflict.