Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: January 3, 2025, 12:02 pm

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Observational Science vs. Historical Science?!
#9
RE: Observational Science vs. Historical Science?!
"Historical science" is a term used to describe sciences in which data is provided primarily from past events and for which there is usually no direct experimental data, such as cosmology, astronomy, astrophysics, geology, paleontology and archaeology. The term is often misused by creationists for any science that "interprets evidence from the past and includes the models of evolution and special creation." It is used to designate those sciences which creationists have complaints about, such as evolution and abiogenesis, and is the opposite of operational or experimental science.
If the hypothetical idea of an afterlife means more to you than the objectively true reality we all share, then you deserve no respect.
Reply



Messages In This Thread
RE: Observational Science vs. Historical Science?! - by MJ the Skeptical - April 27, 2014 at 6:53 pm

Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  The Historical Evidence for the Resurrection of Jesus Christ. Nishant Xavier 38 4210 August 7, 2023 at 10:24 pm
Last Post: LinuxGal
  British Non-Catholic Historian on Historical Longevity of the Roman Catholic Church. Nishant Xavier 36 2681 August 6, 2023 at 4:48 pm
Last Post: LinuxGal
  Isaiah 53, 700 B.C: Historical Evidence of the Divine Omniscience. Nishant Xavier 91 7452 August 6, 2023 at 2:19 pm
Last Post: LinuxGal



Users browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)