LarJgrip Loc: The Fraser Valley

“Although the classical ideal is that scientific theories are evaluated by a careful teasing-out of their internal logic and external implications, and checking whether these deductions and predictions are in-line-with old and new observations; the fact that so many vague, dumb or incoherent scientific theories are apparently believed by so many scientists for so many years is suggestive that this ideal does not necessarily reflect real world practice. In the real world it looks more like most scientists are quite willing to pursue wrong ideas for so long as they are rewarded with a better chance of achieving more grants, publications and status.”

To say “that the theory is phoney, and always was phoney, and this is why it so singularly fails to predict reality is regarded as simplistic, crass, merely a sign of lack of sophistication. And anyway, there are… the reputations of numerous scientists who are now successful and powerful on the back of the phoney theory, and who by now control the peer review process (including allocation of grants, publications and jobs) so there is a powerful disincentive against upsetting the apple cart.”

“Zombie science is science that is dead but will not lie down.” “Zombie science is supported because it is useful propaganda. Zombie science is deployed in arenas such as political rhetoric, public administration, management, public relations, marketing and the mass media generally. It persuades, it constructs taboos, it buttresses some kind of rhetorical attempt to shape mass opinion. Indeed, zombie science often comes across in the mass media as being more plausible than real science.”
Charlton, Bruce G. 2008. Zombie science: A sinister consequence of evaluating scientific theories purely on the basis of enlightened self-interest. Medical Hypotheses, Vol. 71, pp. 327-329.

green Loc: 22.1749611,-159.646704,20

scientists are using the principles of evolutionary biology to create amazing technology...products that help people every day, save lives and makes tons of money for investors...

hardly "zombie science"

LarJgrip Loc: The Fraser Valley

Like…?

green Loc: 22.1749611,-159.646704,20

James Shaw

Science is science (a.k.a.) knowledge. Nothing more than that. Science and knowledge will survive as long as there are curious minds.

Science dispelled the religious idea that the earth was the center of the universe, but that took some time. Curious minds interested in knowledge will dispel superstition always.

LarJgrip Loc: The Fraser Valley

Agreed, but that's not what we're talking about here.

LarJgrip Loc: The Fraser Valley

I dont necessarily disagree with this statement.

green Loc: 22.1749611,-159.646704,20

the best evidence that scientific principles are correct is if they lead to good, solid technology.

Newton's theories of force and motion are embedded within the design of every car... what more evidence do you need to believe his theories?

Einstein comes along and slightly modifies the Newton's theories... for the special case of extremely high relative velocities..

Einstein's theories of force and motion are now embedded within the design of every telescope, spacecraft, particle collider... what more evidence do you need to believe his theories?

LarJgrip Loc: The Fraser Valley

Very true

green Loc: 22.1749611,-159.646704,20

The other thing about scientific "theories", besides their honing as more evidence becomes available...

is that science is much like a 2D pyramid of blocks... each block depends on the blocks below it... if a lower block is removed or changed, then all the other blocks above are affected, or even removed. Every block that is added also hints at the next blocks to be added above it.

Evolutionary biology has given us much of our understanding of how life evolves to adapt to a continuously changing environment. It is one of the very base blocks of the pyramid of biological sciences.

What creation science tries to do, is attack those particular blocks that are in opposition to a strict interpretation of historical events as related in the Bible. You can't just pick and choose which blocks are wrong based on the understanding of desert nomads 2000 years ago.

If those blocks were altered as these creationists propose, our entire understanding of biology would have to be reconstructed from scratch.


Also please note: There is really no overlap between religion and science, they function in different realms. Physics stops short of considering why or who created the universe, that is left to religion. Evolution stops short of considering why or how life was created, that is left to religion.

LarJgrip Loc: The Fraser Valley

In what way are creationists wanting to alter "the blocks"?

green Loc: 22.1749611,-159.646704,20

1) Dinosaurs lived along with humans.
2) All hominid fossils are either fully human or fully ape.
3) The Second Law of Thermodynamics prohibits evolution.
4) The Flood caused the ice age.
5) Radiocarbon dating doesn't work.
6) The Grand Canyon was formed by receding flood waters.

www.google.com%2F" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">http://io9.com/5965884/draft-10-claims-made-by-creationists-to-counter-scientific-theories?commerce_insets_disclosure=on&utm_expid=66866090-48.Ej9760cOTJCPS_Bq4mjoww.2&utm_referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com%2F

boberic Loc: Quiet Corner, Connecticut. Ex long Islander

Are you saying that some scientists are "unethical ", and does this surprise you? Some members of any group are unethical or perhaps even criminal. But the flaw in your argument is your painting with a very broad brush. Theories are constantly tested. And when the test proves that the theory is wrong the theory is discarded or amended.

green Loc: 22.1749611,-159.646704,20

cold fusion lasted about 6 months... then nobody could duplicate the experiment.

LarJgrip Loc: The Fraser Valley

Oh I thought you were suggesting that creationists were wanting to change proven scientific fact which is not the case at all.

Do you know how the Grand Canyon was made?