Changes

::::DonnyC, origins science is a historical science and good historians (historians are social scientists) have reasonable procedures for weighing historical evidence.[http://questionevolution.blogspot.com/2012/09/origins-science-and-avoiding-logical.html][http://history.nasa.gov/thinking/hist-4.html] Therefore, when evaluating claims of God intervening in history, there are reasonable methods to ascertain the probability of those claims being true or untrue. For example, see: [http://questionevolution.blogspot.com/2012/09/origins-science-and-avoiding-logical.html Origins science and avoiding historical fallacies] and [[Historicity of Jesus]] and [[Resurrection of Jesus Christ]] and [[History]]

::::DonnyC, origins science is a historical science and good historians (historians are social scientists) have reasonable procedures for weighing historical evidence.[http://questionevolution.blogspot.com/2012/09/origins-science-and-avoiding-logical.html][http://history.nasa.gov/thinking/hist-4.html] Therefore, when evaluating claims of God intervening in history, there are reasonable methods to ascertain the probability of those claims being true or untrue. For example, see: [http://questionevolution.blogspot.com/2012/09/origins-science-and-avoiding-logical.html Origins science and avoiding historical fallacies] and [[Historicity of Jesus]] and [[Resurrection of Jesus Christ]] and [[History]]

::::Lastly, I cite:  "The scientific method traditionally has required experimental observation and replication. The fact that [[macroevolution]] (as distinct from microevolution) has never been observed would seem to exclude it from the domain of true science. Even Ernst Mayr, the dean of living evolutionists, longtime professor of biology at Harvard, who has alleged that evolution is a "simple fact," nevertheless agrees that it is an "historical science" for which "laws and experiments are inappropriate techniques" by which to explain it." [http://www.icr.org/home/resources/resources_tracts_scientificcaseagainstevolution/]  16:08, 6 May 2013 (EDT)

::::Lastly, I cite:  "The scientific method traditionally has required experimental observation and replication. The fact that [[macroevolution]] (as distinct from microevolution) has never been observed would seem to exclude it from the domain of true science. Even Ernst Mayr, the dean of living evolutionists, longtime professor of biology at Harvard, who has alleged that evolution is a "simple fact," nevertheless agrees that it is an "historical science" for which "laws and experiments are inappropriate techniques" by which to explain it." [http://www.icr.org/home/resources/resources_tracts_scientificcaseagainstevolution/]  16:08, 6 May 2013 (EDT)