Simulation Theory according to Dilbert

[Brian37]

When scientists have competing theories, they settle those disputes in a lab...

I have never heard of anyone digging up a new fossil in a lab, have you?

No IDIOT, fossils get dug up by SCIENTISTS then they compare them, and by that comparing they determine it's place in the fossil record. 

Now show me your independently peer review of  "poof" theory of men magically popping out of dirt.

[Cyberman]

Aquinas' five ways in 3... 2... 1...

[Brian37]

Aquinas' five ways in 3... 2... 1...

Heard that name 15 years ago for the first time. Some recovering addict was my co worker, had "found God". Probably got put in a 12 step program and bought some idiot's slick fake science apology. He used Aquinas too.

Neo still wont accept Christianity is not the only religion with followers that point to their "discoveries". You get Muslims pointing to things like Algebra as evidence of Allah.

[John V]

A prediction was made that a certain type of fossil (lobe-finned fish with characteristics that could be useful for transition to land) would be found in a certain place, that place being based on habitat (shallow water) and age (before first tetrapod). 

But, after it was found, tetrapod fossils were found which were 10 million years older.

Suppose this is so (I will do some Google search on this later to confirm), then the prediction is falsified and theory is adjusted accordingly to fit the counter-evidence. Beauty of science.

If this was an example of a falsified prediction among many successful predictions, then yeah, you could call that science. But that's not the case. Paleontology is better considered as history rather than science.

[Aoi Magi]

Suppose this is so (I will do some Google search on this later to confirm), then the prediction is falsified and theory is adjusted accordingly to fit the counter-evidence. Beauty of science.

If this was an example of a falsified prediction among many successful predictions, then yeah, you could call that science. But that's not the case. Paleontology is better considered as history rather than science.

You do understand that one of the most basic tenets of science is it's claims/ideas/theories are all falsifiable, and that's how science works, right? In any branch if even all predictions and claims have been falsified and readjusted to new evidence, then that is science. If in a subject all testable claims have been falsified, yet the new evidence isn't even being considered, that's religion.

[John V]

If this was an example of a falsified prediction among many successful predictions, then yeah, you could call that science. But that's not the case. Paleontology is better considered as history rather than science.

You do understand that one of the most basic tenets of science is it's claims/ideas/theories are all falsifiable, and that's how science works, right? 

And that's why paleontology isn't science. It doesn't make risky, falsifiable predictions.

[Brian37]

You do understand that one of the most basic tenets of science is it's claims/ideas/theories are all falsifiable, and that's how science works, right? 

And that's why paleontology isn't science. It doesn't make risky, falsifiable predictions.

You must be smoking some good shit.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paleontology

http://www.ucmp.berkeley.edu/paleo/paleowhat.html

https://www.sciencedaily.com/news/fossil...eontology/

On top of Google Search defining it as.

"Paleontology, noun, the branch of science concerned with fossil animal and plants". 

Paleontology most certainly IS a science.

[John V]

You must be smoking some good shit.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paleontology

IMO people are way too casual about what constitutes science. Personally I don't lump sociology in with physics. If you do, that's your choice. As I said, I think paleontology is more like history than physics, and in fact your link says:

Paleontology is one of the historical sciences...

The other main type of science is experimental science...

[Brian37]

You must be smoking some good shit.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paleontology

IMO people are way too casual about what constitutes science. Personally I don't lump sociology in with physics. If you do, that's your choice. As I said, I think paleontology is more like history than physics, and in fact your link says:

Paleontology is one of the historical sciences...

The other main type of science is experimental science...

Oh, now you are just pulling my leg, stop letting "Alternative Facts" Kellyanne Conway use your account.

[John V]

Do you realize that when I said paleontology isn't science, I was expressing an opinion, not making a factual claim? I know you're not the brightest bulb on this site, but come on....