Terrible news for the Creation Science museum (and Republicans)

[AProudLefty]

Then drop the defendant off a 10-story building because Gravity is just a Theory.

LOL.

 

[Cypress]

It wasn’t an exercise in science.

It was a simple matter of picking one out of two options. Why doesn’t anyone pick one?

You constructed a false premise.

You are not pitting two theories against each other.

A falling body is not a theory.

It is an observation.

The theories which have to be pitted against each other are curved spacetime (general relativity) and natural selection (Mendelian version of Darwinian evolution).

Have you ever actually seen curved spacetime?

I have equal confidence in the explanatory power of both general relativity and evolution by natural selection.

 

[AProudLefty]

The interesting thing is that Einstein used the accelerating elevator as an example.

The implication is way more interesting.

 

[Into the Night]

The use of the term narrative is that West VA redneck's lame attempt to place the replete fossil record and evolution of all humans
from a shared ape ancestor on equal footing with the stupid bible fable.

It IS on equal footing with the 'stupid(?)' Bible. Both are religions.

It's not a story you dumb ape, and stating the fact that animals all evolved through natural selection, survival and procreation
of the fittest within their respective niches throughout time doesn't put unicorns, ghosts and stone tablets
from Jebus in the science, ya idgit.

No. You use magick speculations of genealogical claims, unspecified starting points, and magick 'missing links' in your religion instead.

You only post what you do because you are a poorly educated rube with a West VA
residency.

Bigotry.

Now fire up that 1964 Rambler and point it east to the Smithsonian Natural history museum and learn something.

Just saw one of these. Nicely restored too.

 

[Into the Night]

me too.

But according to one moron on the thread, the fact we were not there to witness it makes scientific inquiry into the events of the remote past moot.

Science isn't an 'inquiry'. Science is a set of falsifiable theories. Science has no theory about past unobserved events.

 

[AProudLefty]

Science isn't an 'inquiry'. Science is a set of falsifiable theories. Science has no theory about past unobserved events.

That implies that the prosecution team has no theory as to what happened at a crime scene.

 

[Micawber]

In a sense, I might bet my life on natural selection over general relativity.

Evolution by natural selection has been directly observed in a very tangible way under both laboratory and field conditions.

No one has ever seen curved spacetime.

It's existence is only inferred by indirect detection and theoretical mathematics.

This.

 

[Micawber]

You did not understand my post. Gravity is not better understood than evolution.

This also

 

[Cypress]

The interesting thing is that Einstein used the accelerating elevator as an example.

The implication is way more interesting.

Space, time, even distance and length, are relative and depend on the frame of reference.

 

[Darth Omar]

You constructed a false premise.

You are not pitting two theories against each other.

A falling body is not a theory.

It is an observation.

The theories which have to be pitted against each other are curved spacetime (general relativity) and natural selection (Mendelian version of Darwinian evolution).

Have you ever actually seen curved spacetime?

I have equal confidence in the explanatory power of both general relativity and evolution by natural selection.

Talked your way out of having to face those hungry crocs lol.

That’s slick.

 

[AProudLefty]

Space, time, even distance and length, are relative and depend on the frame of reference.

Yes. With an accelerating elevator, artificial gravity is "generated".

Same with rotating wheel space station.

Both have the same effect.

 

[Micawber]

Falling apples and falling humans are not a theory.

They are observations which have no explanatory power.

I am equally confident that apples fall on the earth, and that earth's rock record shows species change through time.

That is to say I am one hundred percent confident in both observations.

I am about 90 percent confident, give or take, that curvature of spacetime causes gravity, and that natural selection causes speciation.

"Causes" But is gravity a thing or simply an effect of mass on space time. Gravity is perceived as a weak force that pulls objects together at a distance.
What is happening is matter perturbing the fabric of spacetime such that the distance between the objects is eventually eliminated, assuming two objects in a vacuum
with nothing else acting upon them. My hypothesis is that gravity is not a thing at all, it is the apparent effect of other things. It cannot exist without mass and space.
I think we are in agreement. In the same sense that evolution is an effect of all the forces of nature including need to procreate, natural selection, sexual selection,
malleability to change and adaptive frequency of dna....and hell a dose of fucking luck, like not having an asteroid drop near your niche.

 

[Into the Night]

Since they rely on so many assumptions, it makes them different from the ‘hard sciences’ like chemistry or engineering. So they result in different kinds of claims.

It’s the nature of the beast. No pun intended.

There is no such thing as 'hard' or 'soft' science. There is only science, or there is not. Science is a set of falsifiable theories.
Science isn't an area of study.

 

[AProudLefty]

"Causes" But is gravity a thing or simply an effect of mass on space time. Gravity is perceived as a weak force that pulls objects together at a distance.
What is happening is matter perturbing the fabric of spacetime such that the distance between the objects is eventually eliminated, assuming two objects in a vacuum
with nothing else acting upon them. My hypothesis is that gravity is not a thing at all, it is the apparent effect of other things. It cannot exist without mass and space.
I think we are in agreement. In the same sense that evolution is an effect of all the forces of nature including need to procreate, natural selection, sexual selection,
malleability to change and adaptive frequency of dna....and hell a dose of fucking luck, like not having an asteroid drop near your niche.

Yes it is perceived as a weak force. But what is a force exactly? And how is a gravity a force? We should be able to detect it like we did with, say, EM forces.

The EM forces can be generated, clearly.

 

[Into the Night]

stop using the the term narrative in association with evolution. It's not a fucking narrative. It's scientific fact.

The Theory of Evolution is not a theory of science. It is not possible to go back to see what actually happened. The theory is not falsifiable.

 

[Into the Night]

A little defensive over evolution are we lol?

Heh. I guess he is.

 

[Into the Night]

The complexity of the problem is not a problem with the method or application of it, dumbfucking hick.
You are devaluing biological sciences based on prejudice and your Jebus fetish, nothing else.

The narrative is the canard that subjects of inquiry have relative "hardness" THINK!

Science is not an area of study. Science is a set of falsifiable theories. Nothing more. Nothing less.

 

[Into the Night]

I never said it was bogus.

Compared to the hard sciences, paleontology results in different sorts of claims.

Compared to science, paleontology does indeed have all sorts of wacky claims.

Thankfully, engineers are forced to make pressure few assumptions when they build bridges.

Bridge building is engineering, not science. It is as much art as it is engineering. The equations used to build a bridge, however, DO come from a variety of theories of science.

How many assumptions are involved in placing extinct critters in a phylogenetic tree?

Many, obviously. Indeed...ALL of them, including designing the tree itself.

And isn’t that at least somewhat of a *subjective* enterprise?

It is pure speculation. That's about as 'subjective' as you can get!

 

[Into the Night]

There wouldn't be strong longitudinal studies without a time component. Hell human history is a form of science.
In its best sense its recorded data. It doesn't become geologically less "hard" than solar terrestrial physics.

Science is not history. Science is a set of falsifiable theories. That's it. That's all. There is no such thing as 'hard' or 'soft' science.

 

[Cypress]

"Causes" But is gravity a thing or simply an effect of mass on space time. Gravity is perceived as a weak force that pulls objects together at a distance.
What is happening is matter perturbing the fabric of spacetime such that the distance between the objects is eventually eliminated, assuming two objects in a vacuum
with nothing else acting upon them. My hypothesis is that gravity is not a thing at all, it is the apparent effect of other things. It cannot exist without mass and space.
I think we are in agreement. In the same sense that evolution is an effect of all the forces of nature including need to procreate, natural selection, sexual selection,
malleability to change and adaptive frequency of dna....and hell a dose of fucking luck, like not having an asteroid drop near your niche.

I agree in the sense that gravity is not really a force at all, but a geometry imposed on spacetime by matter.