Bunyip
pro scapegoat
That would not be possible. Nor would it be either on topic or in any way relevant to the topic..
What I would prefer would be that you engage with the OP.
-
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!
When does theory become fact?
- Thread starter Desert Snake
- Start date
What I would prefer would be that you engage with the OP.
It is possible. You don't recall what you've said about your expertise in counter terrorism and other fields?
Why is it that you are so willing to go off topic when it comes to criticizing/insulting me (recall that you responded to a post I made about the scientific method; I didn't start making claims about the relevance of my background until you stated any textbook would show that I'm wrong and then dismissed my understanding of my own sources)? I was on topic. I have given more than one argument in this thread concerning theory, fact, and science. When you dismiss me the way you whilst simultaneously claiming without basis you share that you are correct and insulting me for doing what you have done, I can't adequately respond with more arguments on the topic unless I show that your assessment is wrong.
So that's a no?
gnostic
The Lost One
Science rely more on "evidence" or "test" (observation), or any other mean of observation, and less on "proof", thief.
Fact isn't proof, I had never claim that proof is fact, so you are attacking a strawman. But I will say that fact is verifiable evidence.
I don't know if I told you before (maybe it was with someone else), but "proof" is the language of mathematicians, than that of scientists (unless they are theoretical physicists, like superstring theorists).
The term "proof" is a mathematical or logical statement, like mathematical equations for instance, or mathematical models.
It is through empirical evidences or rigorous testings that "verified" or "validated" a scientific theory, not (mathematical) proof. A theory may contained some mathematical equations (or proofs), but these proofs alone don't validate any theory.
In the world of science and mathematics, proof doesn't mean evidence, they have two different meanings.
When scientists talk of "scientific fact", they are actually talking about verifiable "evidences" for the phenomena, and not "proofs".
You need evidences to verify if the theory is valid or not, and theory is an explanation about the fact.
Why do creationist like yourself, don't bother to understand the difference. It feel like you like to wallow in ignorance, for ignorance's sake.
Last edited:
Desert Snake
Veteran Member
Bunyip
pro scapegoat
Yes, and I have not made any false claims whatsoever. As I said this is off topic. You are derailing this thread just to attack me personally.
Because you were obfuscating, you knew what Bob meant when he referred to the scientific method. That there is no single universal scientific method does not in any way effect the point he was making.
It is off topic, a violation of forum rules and pointless - I have not made any false claims in regard to my experience or education, nor have I made any arguments from such authority other than simply to confirm to Sapiens a simple point about historical research.
Last edited:
Actually I'm trying to defend me, as having made a claim that you attacked you proceeded to attack me personally. Also, it is only against forum rules if I don't have your permission. As I don't, I guess I can't defend myself this way and will have to continue to rely on arguments you will dismiss through personal attacks.
Scientific theories are generally frameworks that guide, even define to a large extent, a scientific field. Quantum theory, for example, is the basis for designing and understanding work in particle physics, cosmology, and obviously quantum mechanics. Some theories are more akin to models, but most of these are completely unknown to the layperson and to most scientists. The methods scientists use depend integrally on the theories they are working with. Facts, again, are by definition true. To say something is a fact is just to say it is true, while a theory that simply asserts a truth claim of little use (which is why most theories involve multiple claims along with the relationships among these claims and the relationship between the theory and others).
Thief
Rogue Theologian
Gravity is real...that is a fact...even though we often call it theory.
Theory is explanation...we agree.
Proof of God won't happen.
shawn001
Well-Known Member
There is a lot of water in space. You are avoiding the question on carbon formation. By the way the Oxygen comes from the same process. So either you know where the elements come from or you don't and you don't seem to know.
Yes, you've repeatedly asserted this. However, you've offered nothing to substantiate it.
Whose "we"? First, within the physics literature it is more common to find "gravitation" than gravity, but either way it usually isn't referenced as a theory. Second, in some relativistic quantum field theories and in general relativity it doesn't exist. Third, while gravitation is a major unsolved problem in modern physics (as you've noted before), that just lends less credence to the idea that it is a "fact". However, if you can describe what this "gravity" is such that you can say it is a "fact", maybe that would help.
Bunyip
pro scapegoat
Just to return to the OP.
Theories do not become facts - theories explain the facts. In science theory is the ultimate graduation point of a body of knowledge, there is nothing above it. The Theory of Evolution for example explains a vast body of facts.
Evolution is both fact and theory. The theory of evolution explains the fact of evolution.
Theories do not become facts - theories explain the facts. In science theory is the ultimate graduation point of a body of knowledge, there is nothing above it. The Theory of Evolution for example explains a vast body of facts.
Evolution is both fact and theory. The theory of evolution explains the fact of evolution.
PS I'm not a creationist. It seems to me to be ignorant to support a group of people without at least verifying what they say is accurate.
Just because the Group is highly trained and uses peer review doesn't mean that you take them at there word in fact it makes me highly concerned, I would prefer non-peer review.
I saw the video for shoot the moon and the myth busters claim it proves we were on the moon. Now I don't doubt that we were but really where is the critical thinking.
I am shown a machine and told what it does
I am told what coordinates to use
I am told what the results should be
Sure enough the results are exactly as I am told.
What exactly has that proven, I am very gullible.
Just so you don't think that science will mislead you.
NOAA and several other scientific organizations even in different countries track Santa Claus every year
Nasa hires Artists to create beautiful images of what you would supposedly see in if you went into space and then gives them to you for free.
Cigarettes follow the money. When the tobacco companies where rich they were good for you, when the health care industry got rich there bad for you. Scientifically.
Bunyip
pro scapegoat
Peer review means that you don't have to take them at their word. Also, as in all scientific research - the data is all there for anyone to look at.
Well a great example of critical thinking in that context is when they pointed out that the astronauts left a mirror on the moon which you can bounce a laser off from the earth - which is rock solid evidence indeed.
How are you connecting that with the topic here? The science is different from the advertising.
shawn001
Well-Known Member
Within the physics literature it is common to see gravity as one of the Fundamental Forces of Physics.
I believe when talking about Gravitation, its important to talk about it both as a Law and as a Scientific Theory.
In general relativity Gravitation is described under the theory of general relativity, which defines it as the curvature of spacetime around an object of mass. This curvature, in turn, creates a situation where the path of least energy is toward the other object of mass. Special Relativity is supported by general relativity since the theories are consistent.
Yes, its true we don't know what Gravity is yet. Or time for that matter.
I think we can all agree humans observe gravity.
I believe when talking about Gravitation, its important to talk about it both as a Law and as a Scientific Theory.
In general relativity Gravitation is described under the theory of general relativity, which defines it as the curvature of spacetime around an object of mass. This curvature, in turn, creates a situation where the path of least energy is toward the other object of mass. Special Relativity is supported by general relativity since the theories are consistent.
Yes, its true we don't know what Gravity is yet. Or time for that matter.
I think we can all agree humans observe gravity.
shawn001
Well-Known Member
"I would prefer non-peer review."
So you know this is like saying I want layman doing heart surgery on me.
"I saw the video for shoot the moon and the myth busters claim it proves we were on the moon. Now I don't doubt that we were but really where is the critical thinking."
The LRM took close up pictures of the Apollo sites. They brought back lots of rocks as well. We went to the moon for a fact. I have a great story on it actually to show you, you should watch.
"NOAA and several other scientific organizations even in different countries track Santa Claus every year" they do that for kids.
"Nasa hires Artists to create beautiful images of what you would supposedly see in if you went into space and then gives them to you for free."
That is there job, they also land on other planets and moons and study the universe. In fact one of the greatest discoveries of our time in science was done by them in 2003, although they were working on it before that time.
"Cigarettes follow the money. When the tobacco companies where rich they were good for you, when the health care industry got rich there bad for you."
This is actually somewhat wrong. The tobacco companies still make money and are subsidized by your taxes. It wasn't the "health care industry got rich there bad for you" because they got rich as well. It was science that showed they were bad for you.
shawn001
Well-Known Member
Bob, you should watch this, Charlie has a great sense of humor and there is the most awesome story of a wedding ring ever in it at the end if that is all you watch you won't regret it.
"
Apollo Lunar Missions
Charlie Duke talked about space travel. He was the voice at NASA’s mission control that guided Apollo 11 to its 1979 moon landing. He talked about later walking on the moon himself with Apollo 16 and then narrated a NASA film of that mission.
This was a session of the Explorer Club’s annual “Space Stories” program.
Apollo Lunar Missions | Video | C-SPAN.org
"
Apollo Lunar Missions
Charlie Duke talked about space travel. He was the voice at NASA’s mission control that guided Apollo 11 to its 1979 moon landing. He talked about later walking on the moon himself with Apollo 16 and then narrated a NASA film of that mission.
This was a session of the Explorer Club’s annual “Space Stories” program.
Apollo Lunar Missions | Video | C-SPAN.org
No I have to take it at the group of people trained the same with the same concerns and basically working for the same people. The data being available is my point. Have you ever checked and verified the data or do you just assume the scientists did there job right. You have faith in the scientists.
How do you know the mirror is there. Do you no how to calculate the position so you can hit it with your own laser. I honestly believe it is there but it is a belief. I have no way of knowing. Can you view it from a telescope on earth. If your going to just use there equipment and there coordinates your putting using faith as your guide.
Bunyip
pro scapegoat
To be honest Bob, I do not think that ypu are being very honest here. The mythbusters episode on the moon was full to the brim of rather brilliant applied critical thinking. Science needs no faith, I have no faith in science - it is evidential, not faith based. In fact the scientific method is designed from the outset to eliminate bias.
Because you can see it with a laser Bob and we have the coordinates.
Yes.
That is false, you have the same opportunities to learn more about this stiff as anyone.
Any laser will do the trick, you don't need theirs.
No its not saying I want a layman doing heart surgery on me. Its saying I want some one else to verify the drug before the drug company tests it on me. I still expect the drug company to make the drug but I want some to insure it was not rushed to profit and ends up killing me.
Personally I believe we went to the moon, I believe were in the space station but I can't verify it. Everything that is presented to me is presented through NASA. Where is the independent verification. The space station has had different countries go to it so you could make a case. Now private organizations are flying to space. So we are pretty good on that. But How do you verify you hit a mirror left on the moon. Can you do the calculations, can you build the laser, do you know what results you are supposed to get or do you have faith in science.
The tobacco companies are poor compared to the Met Life, Blue Cross and United Health Care and such. Several of the released documents show scientific results proving cigarettes could not harm you when tobacco was in control.
Did you watch the episode you need a high powered laser. Better yet Please calculate for me the location right now, I'm in west caldwell, NJ and I have a laser pointer. Is there a simple devise I can use to catch the bounce back.
shawn001
Well-Known Member
"No its not saying I want a layman doing heart surgery on me. Its saying I want some one else to verify the drug before the drug company tests it on me"
That is WHY there is peer review. It is no easy process for sure.
"Personally I believe we went to the moon"
Thats good and we did. I am involved with people who went.
I believe were in the space station but I can't verify it.
Yes you can, first you can go to their site and track it and watch it fly over.
ISSTracker ~ Real-Time Location Tracking of the International Space Station
You can also get one of these and it will tell you when it flies over and light up on your desk.
ISS Above | The International Space Station Above YOU TODAY
"Everything that is presented to me is presented through NASA. Where is the independent verification."
Of what? The space Station, I just told you and the moon there is lots of info. But what else. We went to Titan? We landed on Mars?
Other countries work with NASA and tons of private companies as well and hundreds of thousands of researchers.
"But How do you verify you hit a mirror left on the moon."
Because we have been doing it since the 1969 and you can check it out. Its measuring how fast the moon is moving away from us. Someday Earth won't have a moon, of course by then the sun will go red giant, so we have about 5 billion years on that one.
"Can you do the calculations, can you build the laser, do you know what results "
I don't have to they did it already. Yes you can build a laser and yes you can do the calculations, but getting a mirror on the moon personally would be costly.
Last edited: