1,660
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 92:
Line 92: + + + +
→Clinging to unsupported theories
I look forward to a renaissance in science, wherein scientists are able to say, "We just don't know." Then maybe they'll be open to alternatives to their [[methodological naturalism]]. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] 17:16, 19 March 2007 (EDT)
I look forward to a renaissance in science, wherein scientists are able to say, "We just don't know." Then maybe they'll be open to alternatives to their [[methodological naturalism]]. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] 17:16, 19 March 2007 (EDT)
:...and what comes after the "We just don't know"? --[[User:Sid 3050|Sid 3050]] 17:40, 19 March 2007 (EDT)
:...and what comes after the "We just don't know"? --[[User:Sid 3050|Sid 3050]] 17:40, 19 March 2007 (EDT)
We say that all the time, and '''then''' we develop hypotheses to test in order to learn more. We, as scientists (yes im one of those) do not first try to come up with a ''supernatural'' explanation, when a ''natural'' one is more proper. A "[[Renaissance]]" like you describe is more properly called the "[[Dark Ages]]".
[[User:Palmd001|Palmd001]] 17:46, 19 March 2007 (EDT)