I have never heard of this either. But I agree, updating for accuracy is a good thing.
I don't think religious nutters understand the difference between a hypothesis and a theory. They are used to having any questions they have answered with made up rationalizations by another theist, which will then be allowed to stand as it will be unfalsifiable. What they have given is a hypothesis, not a theory. They probably wouldn't even use the word "theory" because they would see it as weaker than just saying what they have been told is absolutely true.
Imagine if science was like this!
I don't think religious nutters understand the difference between a hypothesis and a theory. They are used to having any questions they have answered with made up rationalizations by another theist, which will then be allowed to stand as it will be unfalsifiable. What they have given is a hypothesis, not a theory. They probably wouldn't even use the word "theory" because they would see it as weaker than just saying what they have been told is absolutely true.
Imagine if science was like this!
Feel free to send me a private message.
Please visit my website here! It's got lots of information about atheism/theism and support for new atheists.
Index of useful threads and discussions
Index of my best videos
Quickstart guide to the forum
Please visit my website here! It's got lots of information about atheism/theism and support for new atheists.
Index of useful threads and discussions
Index of my best videos
Quickstart guide to the forum