RE: God vs Big Bang- Are either correct?
September 12, 2014 at 9:33 am
(This post was last modified: September 12, 2014 at 9:47 am by Anomalocaris.)
Bullshit. A theory is a theory because it is carefully formulated so it can demonstrate itself to be either true or false by making unique predictions about the phenomenon it describes that could tested.
A theory about a phenomenon whose manifestations is multifaceted, such as evolution or the Big Bang, must be able to uniquely account for each facet. But once a theory has shown itself able to uniquely account for most of the major facets, the probability is very high that the theory is basically right in its outline and needs no more than fine tuning to account for all the other assets.
In this case the basic outline can be considered a fact, because we have sound reason to be as certain or more certain of its validity than we normally possess when making colloquial assertions of facts. But at the same time it remains a theory because it is still making unique predictions that is yet to be tested, and it might require more tuning on the margins.
A theory about a phenomenon whose manifestations is multifaceted, such as evolution or the Big Bang, must be able to uniquely account for each facet. But once a theory has shown itself able to uniquely account for most of the major facets, the probability is very high that the theory is basically right in its outline and needs no more than fine tuning to account for all the other assets.
In this case the basic outline can be considered a fact, because we have sound reason to be as certain or more certain of its validity than we normally possess when making colloquial assertions of facts. But at the same time it remains a theory because it is still making unique predictions that is yet to be tested, and it might require more tuning on the margins.
