The fight over Darwin - Teaching evolution in schools

[appolose]

Khuutra said:

appolose said:

Khuutra said:

You are being immensely unclear, and no, all it takes is pretty much one instance to break a law, or even a theory. Sometimes one instance is all we get.

What kind of scenario are you talking about? You suggest matter appearing outo f nothing, but that does not suggest the supernatural. You have yet to suggest anything that would suggest the supernatural. I don't think you possibly could. Ever.

You said it right here, "And yes, it takes more than one observation, but all it takes is a repeatable phenomenon that contradicts a theoyr and the theory's gone, out the window, bye-bye".   That is more than one instance.

My scenario with Rath was "Matter cannot be created physically.  Matter comes into existence"  In conjuction with the first observation (which, mind you, is hypothetical), that gives the situation I described above.   Hopefully, that clears it up.

Then I misspoke.

And sorry, but science does not make absolute statements that way. If we say that matter cannot be created, we only mean it in the context of our understanding of the universe. You might as well say "something breaks the theory of conservation of matter and energy", which is what you are proposing. If such were to happen, then we would change the theory.

Like I said: you can't come up with a scenario that suggests the supernatural. it's not possible.

"If we say that matter cannot be created, we only mean it in the context of our understanding of the universe".  What exactly does this mean?  That we are saying "Matter cannot be created, except when it can"?  Science does make absolute staments: that's what a law is.  The tenet "Once observed enough, it is assumed true" reflects this.  Science does not say "Once observed enough, it is observed that many times", which is what (I think) you are saying; that's fairly redundant and pointless.

My scenario is not at all saying that; it says that matter cannot be created physically.  The 2nd observation does not say that it was created physically (which would change the theory), but merely that it was created.

"Like I said: you can't come up with a scenario that suggests the supernatural. it's not possible".

I am fully aware that this is your position; you need not remind of it over and over.