RE: Vision and Evolution (A Critique of Dawkins)
August 7, 2019 at 11:50 am
(This post was last modified: August 7, 2019 at 11:53 am by John 6IX Breezy.)
(August 7, 2019 at 11:41 am)Grandizer Wrote:(August 7, 2019 at 11:36 am)John 6IX Breezy Wrote: Ok, good, then we're on the same page. Since we don't know what the hypothesis actually is yet, it seemed as though you were calling it terrible because of an assumption that it would be falsified. But we agree then. A hypothesis is terrible when it is formulated in an untestable way, not when it is wrong. Hypothesis are allowed to fail experimentation, and still be great hypothesis.
No, we're not on the same page. You had to be corrected on your usage of the word "theory" in a scientific context.
And good to know you Google at the last minute, at least, lol.
So, are you saying theories are hypothesis that graduated to theories because of positive results? If we run the pixie experiment and the results support the hypothesis, it should be promoted to theory? Because if you're not saying that, then I don't see where I was corrected.
