Customer Discussions > Science forum

When should non-falsifiable hypothesis be rejected?


Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-7 of 7 posts in this discussion
Initial post: Jan 8, 2013 8:17:33 AM PST
Last edited by the author on Jan 8, 2013 10:54:34 AM PST
Unlike proper scientific hypotheses, Naturalisitc Abiogenisis cant be falsified.

You can try and try and fail and fail, as has been done, but this will never PROVE its false

That brings up a question
If you still believe in Naturalistic Abiogenisis, after 100 years of failure,
how many more years of experimental failure will destroy your belief?

And here's a related question.
If you still believe in Iraqi Weapons of Mass Destruction, after 10 years of failure to find them,
how many more years of failure will destroy your belief?

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 8, 2013 8:28:54 AM PST
There is no one specific "hypothesis of naturalistic abiogenesis".

There are, instead, several different hypotheses - models - concerning possible pathways by which naturalistic abiogenesis could have occurred: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abiogenesis#Current_models

As far as I know, none of them have progressed to the point where there is a viable candidate pathway which can be tested.

No one (outside of some misled or dishonest Creationists) claims otherwise.

It's a work in progress... and 100 years is nothing, especially given that the structure of DNA wasn't a published result until 1953.

Christopher Haynes, do you actually read and understand anything I post? I ask because you keep repeating the same things over and over, things which don't match up with the actual evidence.

Posted on Jan 8, 2013 9:02:05 AM PST
Last edited by the author on Jan 8, 2013 9:36:16 AM PST
You still believe in Naturalisitc Abiogenisis?
Whatever floats your boat.

And them Iraqi Weapons of Mass Destruction
You must still believe in them too.

As you would say, there is no one "specific hypothesis" about where them weapons are.
Hey they could be under a gas station in Basra.
Or hidden in a toolshed in Kirkut.
You want hypotheses? Boy do I got hypotheses

And "As far as I know, none of them have progressed to the point where there is a viable candidate pathway which can be tested".
Interesting idea. After 10 years, you dont got a clue where to look for them weapons. That means they got to be there.

"It's a work in progress... and a dozen years is nothing, (Hey, look at naturalisitc Abiogenisis, that's 100 years) especially given that " we didnt invade Bagdad until 2003.
Trust me we'll find them weapons.
If it takes 10,000 years.

Us Creationsits we figured this long ago.
Them weapons they didnt exist.

Anyhow, I got another question.
If you still believe in Iraqi Weapons of Mass Destruction, after 10 years of failure to find them,
how many more years of failure will destroy your belief?

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 8, 2013 10:17:36 AM PST
Warning: Christopher Haynes doesn't seem to actually read / understand anything which is posted in response to his posts. He just keeps repeating the same false statements, across multiple discussions in multiple forums.

If you wish to respond for the sake of other discussion participants, that would be worthwhile, IMO, but there's no point in addressing your comments directly to him, as he is either unwilling and/or unable to understand what you have to say, or engage in anything like meaningful, substantive dialog.

Posted on Jan 8, 2013 1:41:49 PM PST
It has been 2000 years since Jesus proclaimed the second coming in his generation. Isn't it time to reject this hypothesis?

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 8, 2013 2:10:01 PM PST
not at all

you dont understand the bible at all

He is coming soon
not more than 50-150 more years

God is in no hurry just because you are

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 8, 2013 2:50:49 PM PST
horseydoodoo

Jesus was the one who said the generation now living. He set the deadline.
‹ Previous 1 Next ›
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in
 


 

This discussion

Discussion in:  Science forum
Participants:  4
Total posts:  7
Initial post:  Jan 8, 2013
Latest post:  Jan 8, 2013

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.

Search Customer Discussions