Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Theory
a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world; an organized system of accepted knowledge that applies in a variety of ...hypothesis
a proposal intended to explain certain facts or observationsThere seems to be a large difference. A theory is a well-substantiated explanation where as a hypothesis is a proposal.
Is it possible to disprove a theory, or is it 100%?
Originally posted by Quiero Mota
Since a theory has yet to be proven, its not too far removed from a hypothesis is it?
You still don't understand the sceintific definition of a theory.
This is Wikipedia's definition, which isn't half bad. I'll try to get somthing official from a Dicationary of science.
"In science, a theory is a mathematical or logical explanation, or a testable model of the manner of interaction of a set of natural phenomena, capable of predicting future occurrences or observations of the same kind, and capable of being tested through experiment or otherwise falsified through empirical observation."
A scientific theory is very far removed from a hypothesis. A scientific theory is composed of a set of proven hypothesis.
Theories are continuously modified as new information is learened, but they can be used as if they are fact. It would be appropriate to say that a Theory describes the most factual presentation of a set of natural phenomena at any given time. Theories of electromagnetism and opitcs allow you to read this response (ie, the machines used to transmit recieve, etc. this message were constructed based on theories of how electricity works)
Originally posted by Adam_PoE
That is equivocal to treating measles with penicillin because it works on an ear infection; just because some not A are B, it does not follow from this that all B are not A.
Why is it necessary / how does this:
Originally posted by Zeal Ex Nihilo
Like I said, I'm not saying that artificial things should be viewed as actually having evolved, in the biological sense. I'm saying that one should look at them that way for perspective.
Accomplish this:
Originally posted by Zeal Ex Nihilo
Eliminating anthropic bias.
Originally posted by Alliance
You still don't understand the sceintific definition of a theory.This is Wikipedia's definition, which isn't half bad. I'll try to get somthing official from a Dicationary of science.
"In science, a theory is a mathematical or logical explanation, or a testable model of the manner of interaction of a set of natural phenomena, capable of predicting future occurrences or observations of the same kind, and capable of being tested through experiment or otherwise falsified through empirical observation."
A scientific theory is very far removed from a hypothesis. A scientific theory is composed of a set of proven hypothesis.
Theories are continuously modified as new information is learened, but they can be used as if they are fact. It would be appropriate to say that a Theory describes the most factual presentation of a set of natural phenomena at any given time. Theories of electromagnetism and opitcs allow you to read this response (ie, the machines used to transmit recieve, etc. this message were constructed based on theories of how electricity works)
What about the numerous theories of who wacked Kennedy? Can they not be proved or disproved?
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
The fact that a theory can be tested and possibly falsified is an important part of being a theory. That is one of the main reasons ID is not a theory. ID cannot be tested or falsified. ID is a belief not a theory.
I see.
Originally posted by Quiero Mota
What about the numerous theories of who wacked Kennedy? Can they not be proved or disproved?I see.
To be technical, the "theories of who wacked Kennedy" are not theories. There are no scientific theories about who killed Kennedy. I think you are getting confused with pop culture's use of the word theory. I would agree that ID was a pop culture theory.
Originally posted by Alliance
"In science, a theory is a mathematical or logical explanation, or a testable model of the manner of interaction of a set of natural phenomena, capable of predicting future occurrences or observations of the same kind, and capable of being tested through experiment or otherwise falsified through empirical observation."A scientific theory is very far removed from a hypothesis. A scientific theory is composed of a set of proven hypothesis.
Theories are continuously modified as new information is learened, but they can be used as if they are fact. It would be appropriate to say that a Theory describes the most factual presentation of a set of natural phenomena at any given time. Theories of electromagnetism and opitcs allow you to read this response (ie, the machines used to transmit recieve, etc. this message were constructed based on theories of how electricity works)
I might profile this for future use. I end up trying to explain this same thing to people a lot but usually fumble over the wording.
Originally posted by Quiero Mota
What about the numerous theories of who wacked Kennedy? Can they not be proved or disproved?
Listen. The entire point of my last five posts to you is to try to get you to understand that words in science have specific connotations that may or may not reflect their common usage. Just in the same way "flat" means something different to a musician and a mechanic.
If you're to idiotic to see this simple distinction (as judged by your last post), I'm not wasting any more time. No wonder America is going to sh*t.
Originally posted by DigiMark007
I might profile this for future use. I end up trying to explain this same thing to people a lot but usually fumble over the wording.
Thanks, its still not really great, but I've been working on it.
Originally posted by Alliance
Listen. The entire point of my last five posts to you is to try to get you to understand that words in science have specific connotations that may or may not reflect their common usage. Just in the same way "flat" means something different to a musician and a mechanic.If you're to idiotic to see this simple distinction (as judged by your last post), I'm not wasting any more time. No wonder America is going to sh*t.
I got it. I got it when Shaky explained how ID can't be falsified, so it isn't a theory.
And I don't see how America going to shit is in anyway related to me not immediately understanding a definition.
actually. for people who seem to intentionally misinterpret the scientific meaning of THEORY vs the general term "theory". consider that all of newton's laws of motion and newtonian physics are THEORIES, reletivity is A THEORY, quantum mechanics is a THEORY, thermodynamics is a THEORY, the pythagorean law of the sum of square of base and sum of square of height in a right angled triangle being equal to the square of hypotenuse is a THEORY, any mathematical identities and rules that you have ever read including 1+1=2 is a THEORY. there is NO such thing as scientific FACT. only theories. theories are hypothesis backed up by significant directly related evidence or tons of indirectly related evidence. the theories generally cited as basic science {e.g. kmc etc} are accepted theories of science which have continuously stood the test of time. however, they are still theories and never will be facts.
so unless people wanna disbelieve all that based on the fact that they are THEORIES, it is advisable to not refute evidence {e.g. evolution etc} simply because it is a theory.
the theories about keneddy assasination etc are not SCIENTIFIC THEORIES. in terms of science they are hypothesis.