I forwarded this post to "skeptic", here are some responses. Eva The Textbook League wrote: > The APS definition: > > > Science is the systematic enterprise of gathering knowledge about the > > world and organizing and condensing that knowledge into testable > > laws and theories. > > > > The success and credibility of science is anchored in the willingness > > of scientists to: > > > > 1) Expose their ideas and results to independent testing and > > replication by other scientists. This requires the complete and open > > exchange of data, procedures and materials. > > > > 2) Abandon or modify accepted conclusions when confronted with more > > complete or reliable experimental evidence. > > All that's needed is to eliminate the word "experimental" > from the last line. There are whole realms of science which rely > chiefly or entirely on observing nature as we find it, and in which > experimentation plays little or no role. If the APS promotes the > impression that all science relies on "experimental" evidence, the > APS will reinforce one of the favorite pretensions of the creationists Bill, I read the definition to mean "more complete evidence" or "more reliable experimental evidence". I could be wrong. Perhaps you could email them for a clarification. You raise a good point. Eric > . > The creationists continually try to discredit such enterprises as > cosmology, astronomy and paleontology by claiming that these are not > scientific. They aren't scientific, the creationists say, because all > science must be based on laboratory experiments. By the way, > the creationists have succeeded in getting this view established in > schoolbooks. The next time you see a high-school biology book or > a middle-school earth-science book, for example, please open it and > read what it says about the nature of science and "the scientific > method." > > Bill Bennetta [EMAIL PROTECTED]
