http://teacher.nsrl.rochester.edu/phy_labs/AppendixE/AppendixE.html
Simple as that. On 11/22/05, Jim Davis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Scientists, as a body, should not, ever, be unwilling to test a hypothesis. > That's not what science is about. > > Intelligent Design proponents should be forced to devise tests, perform > experiments and allow peer review of their conclusions just as anybody else. > > To dismiss any idea out of hand, without proper testing, is simply insulting > to science. > > At the same time, of course, ID should, like any other scientific idea, do > all of this BEFORE the subject of its being included in curricula is raised. > > Scientifically (as they want to be considered) no hypothesis would be > included in high-school curricula at this stage. There are thousands of > theories which much more evidence that are still considered to "new" to be > included. ID is no different from a purely scientific viewpoint. > > If testing proves out the notions of the theory then, yes include it. If > not don't. Science, as a whole, asks for nothing more or less. > > > "Thank you, but your ideas are not scientifically testable." > > And right there you've applied scientific standards to the debate. ;^) > > The simple fact is that the IDers have placed this debate squarely on the > scientists "home court" and the scientists are not pressing that advantage > as far as I can see. > > Jim Davis > > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Purchase RoboHelp from House of Fusion, a Macromedia Authorized Affiliate and support the CF community. http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=59 Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:183614 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
