[Catalist] Belief in Creationist Pseudoscience in Australia renaissance

[Paul Walker]

Hi Ray

Correct on all counts

Sent from my iPhone

> On 1 Apr 2018, at 7:31 pm, Ray Forma <rayf at smartchat.net.au> wrote:
> 
> Brendan,
> 
> I feel you are being overly harsh towards those teachers of science who need the crutch of supernatural belief to survive their daily lives.
> 
> However, I also am concerned that there are teachers who present creation science or intelligent design, or both, as legitimate science. Teachers who do so are not teachers of science.
> 
> I lifted the following directly from Wikipedia, and encourage everyone to read the whole article at <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creation_science>. This extract helps me with my understanding of the scientific method.
> 
> A summary of the objections to creation science by scientists follows:
> 
> • Creation science is not falsifiable: An idea or hypothesis is generally not considered to be in the realm of science unless it can be potentially disproved with certain experiments, this is the concept of falsifiability in science. The act of creation as defined in creation science is not falsifiable because no testable bounds can be imposed on the creator. In creation science, the creator is defined as limitless, with the capacity to create (or not), through fiat alone, infinite universes, not just one, and endow each one with its own unique, unimaginable and incomparable character. It is impossible to disprove a claim when that claim as defined encompasses every conceivable contingency.
> 
> • Creation science violates the principle of parsimony: Parsimony favours those explanations that rely on the fewest assumptions. Scientists prefer explanations that are consistent with known and supported facts and evidence and require the fewest assumptions to fill remaining gaps. Many of the alternative claims made in creation science retreat from simpler scientific explanations and introduce more complications and conjecture into the equation.
> 
> • Creation science is not, and cannot be, empirically or experimentally tested: Creationism posits supernatural causes which lie outside the realm of methodological naturalism and scientific experiment. Science can only test empirical, natural claims.
> 
> • Creation science is not correctable, dynamic, tentative or progressive: Creation science adheres to a fixed and unchanging premise or "absolute truth," the "word of God," which is not open to change. Any evidence that runs contrary to that truth must be disregarded. In science, all claims are tentative, they are forever open to challenge, and must be discarded or adjusted when the weight of evidence demands it.
> 
> Amen [Wiktionary: In many Abrahamic religious texts and creeds: truly, verily]
> 
>> On 1 Apr 2018, at 07:31, brendan o'brien <oscience2006 at gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>> What bothers me most is that the god bothererz who spout their unverifiable nonsense here in this science email list will also be doing the same in their science classrooms in front of impressionable children 
>> 
>> Cheers,
>> B
>> __________________________
>> 
>> Brendan O’Brien
>> 
>> oscience2006 at gmail.com
>> @Astrophiz on Twitter
>> Astrophiz Website 
>> Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/Astrophiz
>> Stream or Download Astrophiz Podcasts https://soundcloud.com/astrophiz
>> Find and subscribe 'Astrophiz Podcasts’ on iTunes
>> Soundcloud RSS: http://feeds.soundcloud.com/users/soundcloud:users:13051063/sounds.rss
>> __________________________
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Ray Forma
> Tel +61 (0) 428 596 938
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Catalist mailing list
> Catalist at lists.stawa.net
> http://lists.stawa.net/mailman/listinfo/catalist_lists.stawa.net