RE: Evolution Statement

From: Moorad Alexanian (alexanian@uncwil.edu)
Date: Sat Dec 08 2001 - 10:27:58 EST

  • Next message: Moorad Alexanian: "RE: Evolution Statement"

    The prototype of historical science is forensic science. One makes assumptions
    and views the existing data to confirm the assumptions. But one ought not
    confuse the assumptions with the conclusions----evolutionary theory assumes
    something and cannot conclude unambiguously that the assumption is a fact. The
    predictions are backward in time, whereas in an experimental science like
    physics, the predictions are mostly forward in time. Moorad

    >===== Original Message From kbmill@ksu.edu (Keith B Miller) =====
    >I have stated this several times in previous posts -- historical science IS
    >predictive. Hypotheses are continually being tested by comparing
    >expectations of the hypotheses with future observations. It doesn't matter
    >that the events being reconstructed are in the past, only that the specific
    >observation or data was unknown to the investigator previous to the
    >prediction. This is done all the time. In my own research I am
    >continually testing my expectation against new observations. If they prove
    >out, my confidence in my hypothesis increases, if they don't that
    >confidence is weakened. If expectation are frequently not met, the
    >hypothesis is abandoned. That is the way all scientific theorizing works.
    >
    >The recent discovery of the walking whales from Pakistan are a great
    >example within the field of paleontology.
    >
    >Keith
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >Keith B. Miller
    >Department of Geology
    >Kansas State University
    >Manhattan, KS 66506
    >kbmill@ksu.edu
    >http://www-personal.ksu.edu/~kbmill/



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Dec 08 2001 - 10:28:07 EST