Difference between revisions of "Origin science"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
m (emphasis) |
m (internal links) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | '''Origin science''' studies past ''singularities'' rather than present ''normalities''. It focuses on things that only happened once and, by their nature, are unlikely to happen again. It is more like a forensic science rather than being an empirical science and due to impossibility to repeat past events, it uses analogies between the kinds of [[Cause and effect|cause-effect relationships]] that we see today. Origin science claims to give only ''plausible'' answers rather than ''definitive'' ones. It tries to study the remaining evidence of past events and measure interpretations by their ''explanatory power''.<ref>{{Cite book | + | '''Origin science''' studies past [[singularity|''singularities'']] rather than present ''normalities''. It focuses on things that only happened once and, by their nature, are unlikely to happen again. It is more like a forensic science rather than being an empirical science and due to impossibility to repeat past events, it uses analogies between the kinds of [[Cause and effect|cause-effect relationships]] that we see today. Origin science claims to give only ''plausible'' answers rather than ''definitive'' ones. It tries to study the remaining evidence of past events and measure interpretations by their ''explanatory power''.<ref>{{Cite book |
| author = Norman L. Geisler and Ronald M. Brooks | | author = Norman L. Geisler and Ronald M. Brooks | ||
| year=1990 | | year=1990 | ||
Revision as of 17:59, March 8, 2012
Origin science studies past singularities rather than present normalities. It focuses on things that only happened once and, by their nature, are unlikely to happen again. It is more like a forensic science rather than being an empirical science and due to impossibility to repeat past events, it uses analogies between the kinds of cause-effect relationships that we see today. Origin science claims to give only plausible answers rather than definitive ones. It tries to study the remaining evidence of past events and measure interpretations by their explanatory power.[1]
References
- ↑ Norman L. Geisler and Ronald M. Brooks (1990). "10. Questions about Science and Evolution", When Skeptics Ask. Victor Books, Baker Books. ISBN 978-0-8010-7164-5. Retrieved on 25.1.2012.