Changes

197 bytes added ,  19:35, March 30, 2007
Line 242: Line 242:  
:Ok, this has nothing to do with ad hominem statements.  It really is true that in the vast majority of th scientific community, the definition of theory is not an issue.  I am not saying that those who disagree are nut-jobs, just not part of the vast majority of the scientific community.  Of course in American culture, there is a HUGE controvery about Evolution vs ID, etc.  and in the discourse of the ID partisans, this whole theory definition is an issue.  That's why I think the discussion belongs in the IDish articles, not in the definition of theory.--[[User:palmd001|PalMD]]<sup>[[User_talk:palmd001|talk]]</sup> 15:25, 30 March 2007 (EDT)
 
:Ok, this has nothing to do with ad hominem statements.  It really is true that in the vast majority of th scientific community, the definition of theory is not an issue.  I am not saying that those who disagree are nut-jobs, just not part of the vast majority of the scientific community.  Of course in American culture, there is a HUGE controvery about Evolution vs ID, etc.  and in the discourse of the ID partisans, this whole theory definition is an issue.  That's why I think the discussion belongs in the IDish articles, not in the definition of theory.--[[User:palmd001|PalMD]]<sup>[[User_talk:palmd001|talk]]</sup> 15:25, 30 March 2007 (EDT)
   −
:I would agree.  Ed, we understand that you are on neither side of the TOE and ID debate.  However, you are feeding into the argument.  There is a major difference between the two thoughts.  ID has yet to undergo any scientific research so to list this in the theory article detracts from the main point.--[[User:Tims|TimS]] 15:33, 30 March 2007 (EDT)
+
:I would agree.  Ed, we understand that you are on neither side of the TOE and ID debate.  However, you are feeding into the argument.  There is a major difference between the two thoughts.  ID has yet to undergo any scientific research so to list this in the theory article detracts from the main point, as it stands the "theory of ID" is not a theory, it has not been allowed to be tested due to a lack of fundamental definition of what constitutes intelligence and how it could influence diversity.--[[User:Tims|TimS]] 15:33, 30 March 2007 (EDT)
686

edits