posted on Jan, 28 2010 @ 07:08 PM
Both Darwinism and Global Warming are THEORIES. By definition, a THEORY is an analytic structure created to explain a set of empirical observations.
A scientific theory does a few basic things:
1. it identifies this set of distinct observations as a class of phenomena, and
2. makes assertions about the underlying reality that brings about or impacts this class/ and
3. allows assumptions that may be tested.
It comes from the greek 'theoria' = to speculate or wonder.
Both Darwinism and the theory of global warming do each of the above things. Further, it follows that a theory can NEVER be proved. A theory can be
'underdetermined' if, given the available evidence cited to support the theory, there is a rival theory which is inconsistent with it that is at
least as consistent with the evidence.
Also, If there is a new theory which is better at explaining and predicting phenomena than an older theory (i.e. it has more explanatory power), we
are justified in believing that the newer theory describes reality more correctly.
In the case of global warming theory, in for example, there are many alternative explanations that can be tested to explain the observed & reported
phenomenon. One alternative explanation is that the observers misread, mismeasured or otherwise LIED about the data upon which they based their
conclusions. Another corollary of this contention is that those funding the research funded only very specific findings findings rather than
supporting the search itself. This is exactly what happened with Galileo and the early debates about the geocentric vs. heliocentric theory of our
To quote Al Gore about the global warming thoery, "the science is settled." However, some wise man said something to the effect that when we
start thinking that science is settled, we have started preaching dogma rather than practicing the scientific method.
Go read Thomas Kuhn's excellent "The Structure of Scientific Revolutions." He describes the science/dogma in very great detail. IT's neat to