Jump to content


Photo

Scientific Method?


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
8 replies to this topic

#1 jason

jason

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 662 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 38
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • florida

Posted 28 November 2011 - 05:03 PM

http://www.icr.org/a...ontent=FaceBook

for those on facebook or go to icr.org.

here

http://www.icr.org/article/6497

#2 jason777

jason777

    Moderator

  • Moderator Team
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2670 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Machining, Engine Building, Geology, Paleontology, Fishing
  • Age: 40
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Springdale,AR.

Posted 28 November 2011 - 11:33 PM

14 percent had observed their colleagues falsifying data? :o Must have been global warming papers LOL. Honestly, I'd predict that the majority were likely in the field of geology. You have break a lot of scientific rules to get millions of years out of the data that can't be explained by anything other than catastrophe.



Enjoy.

#3 MarkForbes

MarkForbes

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 988 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:South Africa
  • Age: 35
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Waverley

Posted 11 December 2011 - 12:49 PM

Just bear in mind that most of this is due to hegemonial paradigm, while some of it is on purpose.

#4 KBC id

KBC id

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 109 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 49
  • no affiliation
  • Agnostic
  • Atlanta, Ga.

Posted 11 December 2011 - 05:03 PM

Just bear in mind that most of this is due to hegemonial paradigm, while some of it is on purpose.


So essentially there are people in power with monetary resorces and there are those who want power and monetary compensation. So, everyone of those people desiring the fame and fortune have a vested interest in aligning themselves with the viewpoint of the people in power and do what they can to produce the desired results in order to get the compensation.

Sounds more like the political method to me and proper science is the loser as well as all the people who form foundations of understanding from what they think is honest science. I should also be noted that the people with a bias to prove capitalize on that misinformation to further their goals long after the error and its maker are discovered. In my mind these people are worse than the original maker by far since they feel they are beyond correction. All they have to say when someone points out their erronious reference information is I didn't know or its too late to correct the error.
If science is so self correcting then why aren't both the erronious informations removed as well as every subsequent paper based on its reference? To let papers stay that were based on bad information is a knowingly dishonest practice and detracts heavily from self correction balancing out the truth.
  • gilbo12345 likes this

#5 gilbo12345

gilbo12345

    Honorable Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 5326 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Completed BBiotech (Honours)

    Currently studying Masters of Teaching.

    Enjoys games of tactics and strategy.
  • Age: 25
  • (private)
  • Creationist
  • Australia

Posted 20 December 2011 - 07:26 PM

So essentially there are people in power with monetary resorces and there are those who want power and monetary compensation. So, everyone of those people desiring the fame and fortune have a vested interest in aligning themselves with the viewpoint of the people in power and do what they can to produce the desired results in order to get the compensation.

Sounds more like the political method to me and proper science is the loser as well as all the people who form foundations of understanding from what they think is honest science. I should also be noted that the people with a bias to prove capitalize on that misinformation to further their goals long after the error and its maker are discovered. In my mind these people are worse than the original maker by far since they feel they are beyond correction. All they have to say when someone points out their erronious reference information is I didn't know or its too late to correct the error.
If science is so self correcting then why aren't both the erronious informations removed as well as every subsequent paper based on its reference? To let papers stay that were based on bad information is a knowingly dishonest practice and detracts heavily from self correction balancing out the truth.

So essentially there are people in power with monetary resorces and there are those who want power and monetary compensation. So, everyone of those people desiring the fame and fortune have a vested interest in aligning themselves with the viewpoint of the people in power and do what they can to produce the desired results in order to get the compensation.

Sounds more like the political method to me and proper science is the loser as well as all the people who form foundations of understanding from what they think is honest science. I should also be noted that the people with a bias to prove capitalize on that misinformation to further their goals long after the error and its maker are discovered. In my mind these people are worse than the original maker by far since they feel they are beyond correction. All they have to say when someone points out their erronious reference information is I didn't know or its too late to correct the error.
If science is so self correcting then why aren't both the erronious informations removed as well as every subsequent paper based on its reference? To let papers stay that were based on bad information is a knowingly dishonest practice and detracts heavily from self correction balancing out the truth.


I totally agree :D

We can also extend this to papers citing things that are now proven to be false or are proven to not support what people thought it supported, (for example every paper claiming that antibiotic resistance is due to evolution, since that has now been falsified with the advent of ancient bacteria being found to possess resistance genes 1000's of years before antibiotics were created). Even textbooks should be changed, as well as notification to those previously taught the erroneous material of the correction/s and what it means to that field, perhaps a corrections column in all the science magazines for that field. However this would be a monumental task in itself, however it is what "should" occur in a "perfect" society.... Such is the problems with self-regulation I fear.

#6 jason

jason

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 662 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 38
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • florida

Posted 23 December 2011 - 06:13 AM

why i am debating that elsewhere

some athiests dont get it.

the dino thing is the best. its a million years old and well what about the water?

#7 AFJ

AFJ

    AFJ

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1625 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Baton Rouge, LA
  • Interests:Bible, molecular biology, chemistry, mineralogy, geology, eschatology, history, family
  • Age: 51
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Baton Rouge, LA

Posted 01 January 2012 - 10:59 AM

14 percent had observed their colleagues falsifying data? Posted Image Must have been global warming papers LOL. Honestly, I'd predict that the majority were likely in the field of geology. You have break a lot of scientific rules to get millions of years out of the data that can't be explained by anything other than catastrophe.



Enjoy.

Jason,
My eyes have seen it. When I travel through hundreds of miles of limestone outcrops from St. Louis on down (on I55), I see all kinds of weird stuff. Most people driving through probably don't even realize this rock they drive through is limestone. Nor do they realize the significance. Of course, academia gives alternate theory that eclipes the truth of God's Word. It's sad that Geode, who claims Christ, defends these false theories.

You see sections that are stratified juxtaposed to sections that are not stratified. You see smoothed hollowed out places on top of the outcrops like a cave or "tube" cut in half, running parallel with the road. It's so smooth, like rock bedding on a stream bottom, it's easy to see it was caused by current. You see large fields, and pastures and all of a sudden a huge upift causing rock cliffs maybe 100 feet high! Boulders sitting free (poosibly caused by man), but some of them are smoothed, so it would appear to be naturally caused.

Then the most extraordinary thing of all. The long slow folds in feet of matching, bending strata. There is no doubt this surficial limestone was wet and bent by earth movement. Many times there are long stretches of strata where they are uplifted--that is they are not level with the ground but they are not cracked. You can tell there was alot of Earth movement, when the stuff was still wet, or it would have been broken up.

Also, I have seen sand that has been deposited by man--large and small piles that stratify/laminate after being dumped. There was one very large one close to my house at a park they were doing construction in. It formed an outcrop ike feature on one side, about 20 feet high. It was completely laminated from top to bottom, with some laminae you could call strata--they were a foot thick! This has to be a chemical behaviour in the sand. Just a personal theory--water being polar causes the sand grains to align subsurface, where the sand is moist.

I wished Geode would finally acknowledge this obvious evidence that is not paid attention to by the average person, who could care less about science, yet accept anything someone with a degree tells them.

it all comes down to th fact that because there is no natural causes (normally)for a worldwide flood, therefore it is not scientifically possible. But there is no shortage of sedimentary evidence if you allow for the amount of water in Noah's flood. It's just like a man who is born blind being healed is naturally impossible, but Jesus did such, and even though there is no natural explanation, the intervention of God causes the evidnce afterwards--a man who could see! It was the same with the flood. We don't know for sure what exactly caused it, but we see the evidence afterwards.

#8 jason

jason

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 662 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 38
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • florida

Posted 01 January 2012 - 11:11 AM

with the t-rex issue that seems to be the case, horner has no college degree and yet pushes and advances the toe and is allowed.what if he was a creationist? he would be ridiculed.

funny aint it.

#9 MarkForbes

MarkForbes

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 988 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:South Africa
  • Age: 35
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Waverley

Posted 02 January 2012 - 11:52 AM

So essentially there are people in power with monetary resorces and there are those who want power and monetary compensation. So, everyone of those people desiring the fame and fortune have a vested interest in aligning themselves with the viewpoint of the people in power and do what they can to produce the desired results in order to get the compensation.
...

Just bear in mind that a lot of it is based on non-conscious decisions. When you are taught a certain paradigm at home, at school, at University and this is what you read in most "authoritative" literature, then you are inclined to believe it to be true. Especially if those that dare to question it are shun, personally attacked and ridiculed. Also consider that parts of the common philosophy and way of interpreting things may support interpretations favoring the paradigm. This is however only partially true, when it comes to evolution. Radical Empiricism won't support it. You have to borrow from extra-scientific ideologies to get it going. You can't really falsify it and you have to exclude certain alternative explanations a priori.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users