Scientific Guess
Feb. 22nd, 2008 11:22 am So, in one of ![[profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
datan0de's entries about the phrase "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof", femetalwrote what I think is one of the clearest, most consice, and yet still not angry or offensive, explanation of what scientists mean when they use certain words. We've all heard or said something along the lines of "theory does not mean a guess with no evidence" when referencing those ID-iots who want to include Intelligent Design and/or Creationism alongside evolution as alternative "theories" of the origin of life (let's overlook for the moment that evolution doesn't even cover the origin of life at all - but what happened to life after it began). I'm archiving femetal's post here, both for easy access in future debates and to share with everyone who doesn't happen to read datan0de's journal:
I'm also including an image of the Scarlett A, a la Richard Dawkin's OUT Campaign and Greta Christina's latest blog entry, The Scarlett Letter: Visibility And The Atheist. It's not directly related, but science and atheism is related in my mind and I didn't want to write a whole new entry just to put up a picture of a giant letter.
*Edit: Woo hoo! I figured out how to add images to my sidebar! Now I can permanently "label" my blog as an atheist blog (even though I don't really write much about atheism, but rant against religion). Eventually I'll buy one of the Out Campaign t-shirts too since I normally use my shirts and jewelry to make my political statements for me, to educate the public and to let others know that the're not alone
datan0de's entries about the phrase "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof", femetalwrote what I think is one of the clearest, most consice, and yet still not angry or offensive, explanation of what scientists mean when they use certain words. We've all heard or said something along the lines of "theory does not mean a guess with no evidence" when referencing those ID-iots who want to include Intelligent Design and/or Creationism alongside evolution as alternative "theories" of the origin of life (let's overlook for the moment that evolution doesn't even cover the origin of life at all - but what happened to life after it began). I'm archiving femetal's post here, both for easy access in future debates and to share with everyone who doesn't happen to read datan0de's journal:
I'm also including an image of the Scarlett A, a la Richard Dawkin's OUT Campaign and Greta Christina's latest blog entry, The Scarlett Letter: Visibility And The Atheist. It's not directly related, but science and atheism is related in my mind and I didn't want to write a whole new entry just to put up a picture of a giant letter.
*Edit: Woo hoo! I figured out how to add images to my sidebar! Now I can permanently "label" my blog as an atheist blog (even though I don't really write much about atheism, but rant against religion). Eventually I'll buy one of the Out Campaign t-shirts too since I normally use my shirts and jewelry to make my political statements for me, to educate the public and to let others know that the're not alone
