On science and scepticism
This article at the BBC gives a very good summary of the thinking behind my refusal to debate the merits of any religious explanation of the universe as opposed to a scientific one.
In religion, any single positive correlation can be taken as proof that the entire story is correct. Go on, click here and see for yourself (warning, sense of humour required).
In science, a single negative result can be enough to send an established theory out on its ear.
Important: I am not rubbishing anyone's faith. I simply would like more people to realise that attempting to explain the details of one by using the other is about as sensible as multiplying apples by oranges. The sums don't add up!
Cheviots and cheviots
Well, they're probably not cheviots, but some sort of cross-breed sheep, but anyway....
In religion, any single positive correlation can be taken as proof that the entire story is correct. Go on, click here and see for yourself (warning, sense of humour required).
In science, a single negative result can be enough to send an established theory out on its ear.
Important: I am not rubbishing anyone's faith. I simply would like more people to realise that attempting to explain the details of one by using the other is about as sensible as multiplying apples by oranges. The sums don't add up!
Cheviots and cheviots
Well, they're probably not cheviots, but some sort of cross-breed sheep, but anyway....
posted by LornaJay at 7:54 pm
1 Comments:
Thanks Lorna, for that link to the BEEB. A nice try at explaining the scientific method, it isnt easy to explain to non-scientists.
She also made a mistake I hear a lot about cold weather making people think that 'global warming' is not happening. I wish the phrase 'climate change' would be used instead. It is quite likely that Britain will be colder if, for example, the Gulf Stream stops.
You will be working hard while John's away, I guess!
Dawn
Post a Comment
<< Home