|
Intelligent Design Theory (pg. 26)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| pkcRAISTLIN |
| quote: | Originally posted by srussell0018
There's been tons of theories that have been proven wrong after previously being widely accepted as being absolute truths. |
I would still like you to provide examples of modern scientific theories that have been proven wrong.
| quote: | Originally posted by srussell0018
We don't know how science will advance in the next 10, 20, 30 years, so it'd be silly to say now that what we believe to be true can never change, and will always remain true. I don't see how that's so hard to understand. Yes, I believe in relativity. No, I don't believe that relativity will never, ever, in the future of science, ever be disproven. |
If relativity was disproven, why does technology that uses it work? Disproven is the wrong term imo. “improved” or “refined” are far better words. |
|
|
| srussell0018 |
| quote: | Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
If relativity was disproven, why does technology that uses it work? Disproven is the wrong term imo. “improved” or “refined” are far better words. |
I do agree on that point, but if you "improve" or "refine" a theory, it's still a different theory. Speaking from a philosophical or logical point of view, changing something requires that it not be the same thing, so improvements=different theory. |
|
|
| pkcRAISTLIN |
again i think you're conflating the word "theory" with its scientific usage. most of those listed were hypotheses, not theories. and most of them i'd hardly consider "modern". i mean the cold fusion stuff was absolutely never a theory adopted by science; it completely failed all the tests that scientific hypotheses must go through to become established theories.
| quote: | Originally posted by srussell0018
Speaking from a philosophical or logical point of view, changing something requires that it not be the same thing, so improvements=different theory. |
changing 1 plank on a ship does not make it a different ship. |
|
|
| srussell0018 |
| quote: | Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
changing 1 plank on a ship does not make it a different ship. |
Yes, but if the owner finds a shiny new engine for their ship, and decides that it better fits his ship's needs, he or she may want to change the name of their ship :p |
|
|
| Nrg2Nfinit |
| quote: | Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
again i think you're conflating the word "theory" with its scientific usage. most of those listed were hypotheses, not theories. and most of them i'd hardly consider "modern". i mean the cold fusion stuff was absolutely never a theory adopted by science; it completely failed all the tests that scientific hypotheses must go through to become established theories.
|
didn't i just say this :p |
|
|
| Desiderata |
Well, why would you even try to play the weak card and say I'm playing Devil's advocate after taking classes in this area just to come up with no proof of anything anyone has asked of you, and if you had taken these classes or one class more than likely you would have been taught that Theory in Science is different than the definition of the word Theory so I'm a bit confused.
Just cause you been getting on and your knowledge tested, doesn't make me the person at the bottom end of the stick. I rather misspell wrap in a hurry to Post then take a class on this subject and not know the significance of Theory in Science.
But I'm not here to argue and my Post was not meant to be rude, it was meant to say exactly what it said. Once you understand Theory in Science then you will understand that it holds a lot of weight/support behind it.
I never said you were dumb or incapable of logical thought or valid points but playing Devil's advocate on this issue I think was foolish, then you just became offensive on me out of no where, I don't have a problem. |
|
|
| UWM |
| this is entertaining. |
|
|
| Desiderata |
| quote: | Originally posted by UWM
this is entertaining. |
It always is
NSFW
Thumbs up
http://h6img.com/p/7/thumbs-up.jpg |
|
|
| srussell0018 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Desiderata
Once you understand Theory in Science then you will understand that it holds a lot of weight/support behind it.
I never said you were dumb or incapable of logical thought or valid points but playing Devil's advocate on this issue I think was foolish, then you just became offensive on me out of no where, I don't have a problem. |
I understand theory in science quite well. The fact is, even the term "theory" can be debated in science as well.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy_of_science
I took a class in this in college as well, so I'm looking at it from more than one point of view. I understand what you believe, and what the scientific community believes (and frankly, what I believe) but you must wrap your head around the idea that just because something is an accepted scientific theory, does not necessitate its truth.
It's not the Law of Evolution, and it's not the Law of Relativity. They're still theories, no matter how many people think of them as absolute truths. |
|
|
| Theresa |
| quote: | Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
changing 1 plank on a ship does not make it a different ship. |
Changing 1 plank every day for a year would eventually get you a different ship. The question is, when is it sufficiently "different" enough to be considered not the same as the one before it?
| quote: | Originally posted by srussell0018
|
I am having a hard time understanding why people don't get what you're saying.
It would be entirely ridiculous to take scientific theory as the absolute, infallible truth. The Big Bang Theory is a pretty good theory as far as I know, but since there is no way of ever REALLY proving what happened, you cannot take it as the be all and end all of theories. It is possible that there are some flaws to it. Sure, you can trust that it's the best possible explanation and that it may in fact be perfect in explaining what happened, but there is a chance that it may not be.
There once was a time that people believed that the Sun rotated around Earth. Some believed this to be the indisputable truth. Obviously that was wrong.
Anyway, I think srussell's point is that yes, theories are probably a pretty damn good explanation and very well may be completely right, but it would be kind of foolish to assume that to be the case. There have been theories that have been disproved (read previous example), and there are theories that have been "refined" (read plank question). |
|
|
| D-res |
| quote: | Originally posted by srussell0018
...
It's not the Law of Evolution, and it's not the Law of Relativity. They're still theories, no matter how many people think of them as absolute truths. |
ffs, have you read anything presented in this thread thus far? |
|
|
|
|
