Conservapedia - User contributions [en]

Natural science

2007-04-09T18:30:53Z

Neoconsrock:

Science refers to a system of acquiring knowledge based on the [[scientific method]], as well as to the organized body of knowledge gained through such research.

Science is based on the ontological position of [[Empiricism]], which states that knowledge must be based upon observable phenomena that are both testable (their validity can be falsified) and repeatable (another researcher, working under the same conditions, can produce a similar result). The [[principle of induction]] is used to predict future results derived from a [[hypothesis]] based on previous results.

Science is not to be confused with [[Materialism]], the view that the material realm is all that exists. As a rule, science does not discount the existence of non-observable phenomena, however since theories concerned with such matters are not falsifiable{{fact-scientific}} they are not amenable to empirical investigation, and are therefore not topics that science addresses.

Our understanding of the universe has been increasing [[exponentially]] since Mankind discovered [[agriculture]] 5000 years ago, accelerating yet further with the notable developments of [[Scientific Method]]- the system of [[hypothesis]], [[experiment]], and [[refinement]] that must be used to meet strict peer-review procedures used today, and increasing [[computer]] power over the last 50 years.

The essential elements of a scientific method are iterations, recursions, interleavings, and orderings of the following:

'''Characterizations''' (Quantifications, observations, and measurements)

'''Hypotheses''' (theoretical, hypothetical explanations of observations and measurements)

'''Predictions''' (reasoning including logical deduction from hypothesis and theory)

'''Experiments''' (tests of all of the above)

Most scientific discoveries appear to be in conflict with a [[literal]] interpretation of many [[holy books]], including the [[Bible]]. However, science and empiricism make no claims about the nature of any potential [[supernatural]], [[immaterial]] realm, as these are impossible to assess empirically. Many scientists use philosophical tools such as [[Occam's razor]] and point to phenomena such as [[The God of the Gaps]] to argue for an implicit rejection of untestable hypotheses.

==Kansas controversy==

The definition of science caused a heated controversy in Kansas that drew nationwide attention. <ref>http://www.nytimes.com/2005/11/15/science/sciencespecial2/15evol.html?ex=1289710800&en=8222cfc9c70fd951&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss</ref> Here are the definitions that were at issue for use by the state schools.

:'''Before 2004''': Science is the human activity of seeking natural explanations for what we observe in the world around us.

:'''2005''': Science is a systematic method of continuing investigation that uses observations, hypothesis testing, measurement, experimentation, logical argument and theory building to lead to more adequate explanations of natural phenomena. Science does so while maintaining strict empirical standards and healthy skepticism. Scientific explanations are built on observations, hypotheses, and theories. A hypothesis is a testable statement about the natural world that can be used to build more complex inferences and explanations. A theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world that can incorporate observations, inferences, and tested hypotheses.

:'''2007''': Science is a human activity of systematically seeking natural explanations for what we observe in the world around us. Throughout history people from many cultures have used the methods of science to contribute to scientific knowledge and technological innovations, making science a worldwide enterprise. Scientists test explanations against the natural world, logically integrating observations and tested hypotheses with accepted explanations to gradually build more reliable and accurate understandings of nature. Scientific explanations must be testable and repeatable, and findings must be confirmed through additional observation and experimentation. As it is practiced in the late 20th and early 21st century, science is restricted to explaining only the natural world, using only natural cause. This is because science currently has no tools to test explanations using non-natural (such as supernatural) causes.

==References==
<references/>

[[Category:Science| ]]
[[Category:Religion|The One True Religion]]

Natural science

2007-04-09T18:30:17Z

Neoconsrock:

Date of creation

2007-04-09T18:28:17Z

Neoconsrock:

Calculating the '''date of creation''' has exercised many minds for hundreds of years.

== Basis of calculation ==

The Bible contains [[chronogenealogies]] from Adam to Abraham, listing the age at which each person in the genealogy gave birth to the next person in the list, thus allowing by simple addition a determination of how many years passed between [[creation story|creation]] and Abraham. There are other chronological indications also, allowing that calculation to be extended into the times of the kings, when the dates can be correlated with other events in history for which the absolute date is known. By this means, in theory, one can calculate the date of creation.

There are, however, some uncertainties in this. For example, Genesis lists the age of Terah when the first of his sons was born, but was Abraham this son, or the second or third son?
Different researchers have proposed different answers to this and similar problems, but none of these problems change the result by a very significant amount.

An objection that has often been raised is whether the chronogenealogies were ''intended'' to be used this way, or whether, for example, generations have been missed.
[[Henry Morris]], a pioneer of modern creationism, allowed for the possibility of gaps in the genealogies, but claimed that it was unreasonable to stretch the date back further than about 10,000 B.C.
In more recent times, however, creationists have concluded that there is no reason to think that there are gaps, and this view is supported by the consensus of the experts, according to [[James Barr]], then regius professor of Hebrew at [[Oxford University]], and not a young-Earth creationist (he also wrote a book attacking [[biblical inerrancy]]), who wrote in 1984: "… probably, so far as I know, there is no professor of Hebrew or Old Testament at any world-class university who does not believe that the writer(s) of Genesis 1–11 intended to convey to their readers the ideas that: … the figures contained in the Genesis genealogies provided by simple addition a chronology from the beginning of the world up to later stages in the biblical story." <ref>Quoted in [http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/1606/ Biblical chronogenealogies], by Jonathan Sarfati.</ref>

Old-earth creationists, prompted by a desire to harmonise the Bible with secular dating methods, do not accept this date, proposing that there may be gaps in the genealogies.<ref>[http://www.reasons.org/resources/apologetics/other_papers/primeval_chronology.shtml Are There Gaps in the Biblical Genealogies?], by William Henry Green.</ref>

== Calculated dates ==

The best known date of creation is the one calculated by Archbishop [[James Ussher]] in the 17th century - namely 6:00 p.m. Saturday, [[October 22]], [[2007]] AD.<ref>The Annals of the World, by James Ussher.</ref> However, only the year was based on the Biblical ages; the date and time were based on other considerations. Sir [[Isaac Newton]] defended Ussher's date. Another to calculate the date of creation was [[Johannes Kepler]], who worked it out to be 3992 B.C.

But such calculations in fact date from at least the Middle Ages, and offer a range of dates from around 5000 to 4000 BC. Judaic tradition (to which the Old Testament of course belongs) reckons the date of creation at 3760 BC.

Based mainly on geological dating methods, however, modern scientific research generally dates the formation of the Earth to around 4.5 billion (4.5 * 109) years ago.

== Notes ==
<references />

[[Category:Creationism]]

Date of creation

2007-04-09T18:27:53Z

Neoconsrock:

Calculating the '''date of creation''' has exercised many minds for hundreds of years.

== Basis of calculation ==

The Bible contains [[chronogenealogies]] from Adam to Abraham, listing the age at which each person in the genealogy gave birth to the next person in the list, thus allowing by simple addition a determination of how many years passed between [[creation story|creation]] and Abraham. There are other chronological indications also, allowing that calculation to be extended into the times of the kings, when the dates can be correlated with other events in history for which the absolute date is known. By this means, in theory, one can calculate the date of creation.

There are, however, some uncertainties in this. For example, Genesis lists the age of Terah when the first of his sons was born, but was Abraham this son, or the second or third son?
Different researchers have proposed different answers to this and similar problems, but none of these problems change the result by a very significant amount.

An objection that has often been raised is whether the chronogenealogies were ''intended'' to be used this way, or whether, for example, generations have been missed.
[[Henry Morris]], a pioneer of modern creationism, allowed for the possibility of gaps in the genealogies, but claimed that it was unreasonable to stretch the date back further than about 10,000 B.C.
In more recent times, however, creationists have concluded that there is no reason to think that there are gaps, and this view is supported by the consensus of the experts, according to [[James Barr]], then regius professor of Hebrew at [[Oxford University]], and not a young-Earth creationist (he also wrote a book attacking [[biblical inerrancy]]), who wrote in 1984: "… probably, so far as I know, there is no professor of Hebrew or Old Testament at any world-class university who does not believe that the writer(s) of Genesis 1–11 intended to convey to their readers the ideas that: … the figures contained in the Genesis genealogies provided by simple addition a chronology from the beginning of the world up to later stages in the biblical story." <ref>Quoted in [http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/1606/ Biblical chronogenealogies], by Jonathan Sarfati.</ref>

Old-earth creationists, prompted by a desire to harmonise the Bible with secular dating methods, do not accept this date, proposing that there may be gaps in the genealogies.<ref>[http://www.reasons.org/resources/apologetics/other_papers/primeval_chronology.shtml Are There Gaps in the Biblical Genealogies?], by William Henry Green.</ref>

== Calculated dates ==

The best known date of creation is the one calculated by Archbishop [[James Ussher]] in the 17th century - namely 6:00 p.m. Saturday, [[October 22]], [[2004]] AC.<ref>The Annals of the World, by James Ussher.</ref> However, only the year was based on the Biblical ages; the date and time were based on other considerations. Sir [[Isaac Newton]] defended Ussher's date. Another to calculate the date of creation was [[Johannes Kepler]], who worked it out to be 3992 B.C.

But such calculations in fact date from at least the Middle Ages, and offer a range of dates from around 5000 to 4000 BC. Judaic tradition (to which the Old Testament of course belongs) reckons the date of creation at 3760 BC.

Based mainly on geological dating methods, however, modern scientific research generally dates the formation of the Earth to around 4.5 billion (4.5 * 109) years ago.

== Notes ==
<references />

[[Category:Creationism]]