Back to Home

God & Science Forum Message

Forums: Atm · Astrophotography · Blackholes · Blackholes2 · CCD · Celestron · Domes · Education
Eyepieces · Meade · Misc. · God and Science · SETI · Software · UFO · XEphem
RSS Button

Home | Discussion Forums | God and Science | Post
Login

Be the first pioneers to continue the Astronomy Discussions at our new Astronomy meeting place...
The Space and Astronomy Agora
No Way

Forum List | Follow Ups | Post Message | Back to Thread Topics | In Response To
Posted by Harvey on September 30, 2003 22:20:22 UTC

This matter of prediction is the very key to scientific acceptance. To count prediction as part of philosophy is to discount the very critical element that distinguishes philosophy from science. Philosophy can explain, provide beautiful theories, frame theories in mathematics, etc, but what separates philosophy is that philosophers are not accustomed to having their work tested at Fermi or CERN. If a model is testable, it is a scientific model - not philosophy.

I get the impression that you are just trying to keep Dick's work as free from empirical verification. If that is so, then that is very lame on your part.

Follow Ups:

Login to Post
Additional Information
Google
 
Web www.astronomy.net
DayNightLine
About Astronomy Net | Advertise on Astronomy Net | Contact & Comments | Privacy Policy
Unless otherwise specified, web site content Copyright 1994-2018 John Huggins All Rights Reserved
Forum posts are Copyright their authors as specified in the heading above the post.
"dbHTML," "AstroGuide," "ASTRONOMY.NET" & "VA.NET"
are trademarks of John Huggins