Yes you did and you cited David Martin as saying it. See posts #188 and #213, and my posts #184 and #206,
You can go back even further
Last edited:
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
What is "Bad" Science?
- Thread starter dybmh
- Start date
You can go back even further
Ebionite
Well-Known Member
No I didn't, coronavirus and covid-19 are not the same thing.
Pogo
Well-Known Member
Well now you will know a little more. from your post 188
"Key Points: COVID-19 was first isolated in 1965: Dr. Martin stated that COVID-19 was first isolated in 1965, more than 50 years ago, and that it was recognized as a pathogen with the..."
In the citations David Martin claimed a Covid-19 Model was isolated in 1965 and it was the basis for his accusation that Pharma companies produced and released Covid-19 and SARS viruses. Refer to ALL the posts in the issue of the chain of David Martin lies, which you accept.
References your posts #188 and #213, and my posts #184 and #206, See also posts #159 and *I64
Ebionite
Well-Known Member
No, he didn't. He was talking about a coronavirus model, not a covid-19 model.
Pogo
Well-Known Member
That might even be true, but it is not what you said.
Beyond that, a reasonable education and understanding of the subject makes it relatively obvious that the other statements attributed to him are equally questionable.
Best bet, admit your error and walk away from him.
PureX
Veteran Member
Yes, that kind of inclination is why they want to insist on using the term "conclusion". Because for them IT IS. Even though within the endeavor of science, it never is.
Pogo
Well-Known Member
All I have to say to this is that in this case your conclusion is false and the sooner you admit it the sooner you will understand that it is not a statement of finality but a statement, of what the evidence seems to indicate thus far.
PureX
Veteran Member
Then it's not a "conclusion", is it. It's just a current working hypothesis.
YoursTrue
Faith-confidence in what we hope for (Hebrews 11)
Sorry, Presumptive Pogo -- you really do need to learn more about science and medicine and doctors.
Pogo
Well-Known Member
You are getting there, and we investigate it with new hypotheses. It is still a conclusion even if only a provisional one.
PureX
Veteran Member
There is no such thing as a "provisional conclusion".
Pogo
Well-Known Member
Though Doctors may talk down to you in avoidance of your oft demonstrated propensity for unreasonable questioning, be assured that they know very well that no knowledge in their field is absolute any more than any other science, it is a defense mechanism on their part to keep their lives and practices moving.
Pogo
Well-Known Member
Chat GPT's answer;
"What does provisional conclusion mean?
A provisional conclusion refers to a tentative or temporary conclusion that is reached based on the available evidence or reasoning at a particular point in time. It implies that while a decision or judgment is made, it remains subject to further investigation, evaluation, or revision in light of new information or deeper analysis.
In academic or scientific contexts, researchers often draw provisional conclusions when they have gathered initial data or conducted preliminary experiments. These conclusions are presented with the understanding that they may change as more data is collected, different methodologies are applied, or alternative interpretations are considered.
Similarly, in everyday contexts, a provisional conclusion might be drawn based on the information at hand, with the acknowledgment that additional factors could influence the final determination.
In essence, a provisional conclusion is not final or definitive but serves as an interim position based on current understanding or evidence."
I don't see anything in here about non-existence.
A coronavirus model was not isolated in 1965, A common cold virus was,
The use of conclusion on research papers only involves the results of that particular research and in science has never had the connotation of being absolutely true,
Scientific Conclusions | Definition, Steps & Examples | Study.com
Learn the scientific conclusion definition and understand the scientific method and conclusion. Discover how to write a scientific conclusion and...study.com
How do you write a conclusion for science?
Scientific conclusions should be written after the first four steps of the scientific method are completed. They are Question, Hypothesize, Experiment, Analyze, and then finally Conclude. The conclusions should include contextual information, experimental results, analysis, and the conclusion drawn from that data.
The use of conclusion on research papers only involves the results of that particular research and in science has never had the connotation of being absolutely true,
Scientific Conclusions | Definition, Steps & Examples | Study.com
Learn the scientific conclusion definition and understand the scientific method and conclusion. Discover how to write a scientific conclusion and...study.com
How do you write a conclusion for science?
Scientific conclusions should be written after the first four steps of the scientific method are completed. They are Question, Hypothesize, Experiment, Analyze, and then finally Conclude. The conclusions should include contextual information, experimental results, analysis, and the conclusion drawn from that data.This site covers how to write a conclusion and goes into the tentative nature of research paper conclusion. The text canot be copied,
Also , , , What is a conclusion in the scientific method? | Socratic
A conclusion is a short paragraph that discusses the overall results of an experimental procedure and explains whether the proposed hypothesis at the beginning of the experiment was correct or not.
It can also be discussed in the conclusion further experiments or test that could be done to support your findings in the current experiment. This part could also be called perspectives.
Last edited:
Pogo
Well-Known Member
This seems to be a difficult concept for those who believe that their chosen idol is infallible and omniscient, I am not referring to their God concept, but to their understanding and interpretation of an ancient book. The written word somehow takes on some sort of extra meaning.
Many layman with a religious agenda rely on rigid warped and misleading layman definitions, like "random," :evidence" and "conclusions ignoring deliberately the scientific vocabulary
A working hypothesis is different from a conclusion in scientific papers. See post #296
Pogo
Well-Known Member
Objection here being the definiton of layman. none of these should be beyond anyone with a basic HS education, so just what are laymen?