Science is a tool that can be abused!

[_spotlight]

Joe has a twin who has worked with him on the murder. What you fail to consider is ALL theories can be broken with new data.

Well let's think about this. The precession of the perihelion of Mercury is found to be due to the specific interference of pixies at some future date. Therefore we might one day dust off Newton's Laws and restore them to their rightful place while tossing GR. Something like that Frank?

Elements and their behavior are not comparable to people and their behavior Frank. What you fail to consider are the limitations of a metaphor.

[_Gunnar]

All it took to break Newtonian mechanics was the precession of the perihelion of Mercury. So all of your crowing about how what we now know will one day all be obsolete is already true about dualism. It just hasn't filtered down to everyday people in society yet. Give it another generation for that to happen.

About Newtonian mechanics, I prefer to look at it is not so much disproved, as proven to be a not quite complete or perfectly accurate description of how the universe works. For most practical. every day purposes it is more than accurate and precise enough, and produces errors that are immeasurably small even by some of our most amazingly precise measuring devices. Even rocket scientists use Newtonian mechanics to calculate the trajectories of space probes launched into orbit and to other destinations in the solar system. As I understand it, Newton's three laws of motion are still perfectly valid when we recognize that mass and energy are two different aspects of the same thing, and can be converted into each other.

I completely agree with you on this. I was making a point to Franktalk about falsification. It all seems to be over his head so I don't know how much longer I'll bother responding to his nonsense if nothing seems to crack through the wall he's hiding behind.

I hear you! Backfire effect is a very difficult nut (or wall) to crack!

[_Franktalk]

Well let's think about this. The precession of the perihelion of Mercury is found to be due to the specific interference of pixies at some future date. Therefore we might one day dust off Newton's Laws and restore them to their rightful place while tossing GR. Something like that Frank?

Elements and their behavior are not comparable to people and their behavior Frank. What you fail to consider are the limitations of a metaphor.

Let us consider an analysis of a group of people. We may find that tall people like the color red more than the rest of the population. Then we find that tall people tend to get brain tumors and that makes them like the color red. Then we find that tall people hit their heads more often than short people which leads to brain tumors. Then we find that short people make things short to force a die out of tall people so they can get the hot chicks. Then we find out that hot chicks have brain washed short people into making things short. Then we find out that aliens have shot mind control rays at the hot chicks making them brain wash short people. Then we find out that the aliens ate at Joe's and the food was bad so they hatched a plot against tall people because Joe was tall. Then we find out .............

The point is we do not know everything, so we guess at why things happen the way they do.

Siberian Discovery Suggests Almost All Dinosaurs Were Feathered
link july 2014
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news ... s-science/

and just a year later

Most dinosaurs had scales, not feathers, fossil analysis concludes
link june 2015
https://www.theguardian.com/science/201 ... -concludes

OMG you mean we went back to the old theory?

It gets even better. Just how many species are on the earth today?
"How Many Species on Earth? 8.7 Million, Says New Study"
http://www.unep.org/newscentre/default. ... cleID=8838

How many different species of fossils have been found?
"The number of different kinds of fossils (species) is much less, I think the figure is a few hundred thousand."
http://www.askabiologist.org.uk/answers ... hp?id=1408

300,000/8,700,000 = 3.4% Yet science has made an elaborate story about the early history of life on the earth. I wonder how many times the feather question will bounce back and forth?

I just love science don't you? It is like the weather. Changes all of the time.

[_spotlight]

Let us consider an analysis of a group of people. We may find that tall people like the color red more than the rest of the population. Then we find that tall people tend to get brain tumors and that makes them like the color red. Then we find that tall people hit their heads more often than short people which leads to brain tumors. Then we find that short people make things short to force a die out of tall people so they can get the hot chicks. Then we find out that hot chicks have brain washed short people into making things short. Then we find out that aliens have shot mind control rays at the hot chicks making them brain wash short people. Then we find out that the aliens ate at Joe's and the food was bad so they hatched a plot against tall people because Joe was tall. Then we find out .............

The point is we do not know everything, so we guess at why things happen the way they do.

In this imagined scenario you failed to make your point. You simply removed the cause further back with each "new discovery." The fact remained throughout that tall people like red more than the rest of the population. What changed was the reason or the ultimate cause for this. The fact remained unchanged. There are facts that falsify dualism which likewise do not change whatever the ultimate reason for those facts may prove to be.

In this example the theory that is disproved is that all people independent of their height have equal statistical affinity for the color red. That theory is disproved by the fact that tall people have a higher affinity for the color red than the rest of the population. And the rest of your story does not change that reality nor change the falsified state of the theory in question.

[_spotlight]

Siberian Discovery Suggests Almost All Dinosaurs Were Feathered
link july 2014
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news ... s-science/

and just a year later

Most dinosaurs had scales, not feathers, fossil analysis concludes
link june 2015
https://www.theguardian.com/science/201 ... -concludes

OMG you mean we went back to the old theory?

From your 2nd reference:

“What we found from this analysis is that the first dinosaur was probably not feathered,” said Campione. “Feathers clearly evolved in the dinosaur lineage, but right now, the data do not point to a feathered ancestor for them all.”

You see this as a problem for the scientific method? Wow Frank. Maybe they should leave the data alone and take an inward journey to decide what happened.

The data early on were sparse and allowed the possibility that the ancestor of all dinosaurs had feathers. With more data the possibilities were further constrained to discount that model. That's the way science works Frank just like further data has discounted the existence of detachable souls.

There was no going back and forth between theories Frank. The data were never sufficient to determine the case until the data were discovered.

[_spotlight]

It gets even better. Just how many species are on the earth today?
"How Many Species on Earth? 8.7 Million, Says New Study"
http://www.unep.org/newscentre/default. ... cleID=8838

How many different species of fossils have been found?
"The number of different kinds of fossils (species) is much less, I think the figure is a few hundred thousand."
http://www.askabiologist.org.uk/answers ... hp?id=1408

300,000/8,700,000 = 3.4% Yet science has made an elaborate story about the early history of life on the earth.

We know how old the fossils are Frank. We know single celled life existed by itself for the vast majority of early earth history. The fact that fossilization is rare agrees with what we find so no surprise there. Sorry Frank but it is consistent. Something you lack in your beliefs.

What percent of those fossils are not represented by living life forms today? Where did they go Frank? Why are only a small percent of fossils similar to present life forms? If the earth were not old what explanation is there for this fact? Why is it that those fossils that are similar to living forms are found only in recent rock layers? Where did all of the life forms come from that have no fossil representation? Oh you'd like to lean on fossilization is a rare event now perhaps?

How many of today's animals are being preserved via fossilization Frank?

And what about your elaborate story of planting life forms on the planet Frank. You really suffer from the double standard don't you? The very fault that exists in your imagined beliefs you try to project onto science to discredit it? What kind of cog-dis you must be suffering from one can only imagine!

I just love science don't you? It is like the weather. Changes all of the time.

Unlike you and Nightlion which are on the same page.

[_Franktalk]

Frank,
Reading between the lines you are saying our environment/planet was tailored and planned to harbor us. Do you have any evidence to support this, or does the evidence support the idea that life has arisen to fill the conditions of the environment?

Let us say that the earth was terraformed using natural methods like we would use on another world. Would a terraformed planet appear different than earth does today? In my mind earth would appear as it does if it was terraformed. So we are not talking about evidence we are talking about how we interpret the evidence we find. Science assumes no intervention of an outside intellect so the theories about the past tell that story. But using the same evidence and assuming intervention a different story could be written.

Because of my inward journey I know things science does not. This is why I view things so different than people of science. Just 15 years ago I also viewed the world the same way science does today. But I received personal information which has changed the way I view the world and how I interpret what I see. Without this personal knowledge I also would still believe what I used to believe. And I accept that anyone who has not taken the journey will not accept my personal knowledge as credible. I am fine with that. In fact that is the way this place is supposed to work. Most do not wish to have the mysteries laid open to view. They prefer to embed themselves in this world and believe in the physical world as the end all of everything. There is nothing wrong with this. It is our choice to make. Free will is a guiding principle of the universe and we choose to believe what we wish.

I could point out the quick jumps in evolution as pointing to intervention but again that is in the eye of the beholder what that means.

Now ask yourself a question. If you terraformed a planet without inhabiting it till the end would that planet appear as the earth does today? Now don't consider time a factor. Think of yourself as eternal.

[_spotlight]

What Frank misses here is the time limit of life on earth orbiting our sun. Something like 8 to 10 billion years at most before the expanding sun will end it all for life on earth. So the eternal beings, not being in any particular hurry because hey they are eternal and rather lethargic in getting around to getting things done since there is nothing pressing them to act quickly when you live forever you know. These eternal beings after wasting the first 5 billion years to get to the point where they can put man onto their terraformed world have a couple of billion years before the planet is engulfed by the expanding sun. So they have wasted most of the time the earth can exist on... wait for it... an nice place for single celled organisms to exist. Yeah that makes a lot of sense, not.

[_The CCC]

Steven Jay Gould would kick your butt for your misuse of his Punctuated Equilibrium.
SEE https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Punctuated_equilibrium

[_The CCC]

Delete