Comments on: Dominant paradigms in science and their attendant anomalies http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/dominant-paradigms-in-science-and-their-attendant-anomalies/ Serving The Intelligent Design Community Mon, 13 Feb 2012 17:45:48 +0000 hourly 1 By: Robert Byers http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/dominant-paradigms-in-science-and-their-attendant-anomalies/comment-page-1/#comment-360008 Robert Byers Tue, 27 Jul 2010 01:41:15 +0000 http://www.uncommondescent.com/?p=14182#comment-360008 AMEN. I read this guys book and it was informative on in geology correction is needed and always a astonishment or revolution. I find from the evolution thumpers and company they try to say science can't be wrong but only keeps adding information to change results. They don't like to accept that science can be wrong. its very prestige is that its a higher form of conclusion drawing. AMEN. Origin issues are not science. They are not testable in their claims of processes or results. not proved like actual science stuff. So after time has passed with much "error" apparent in many subjects they must account for this. The new idea is that a paradigm is dominating thinkers in science and this controls imagination or free thinking and so error in subjects is replicating. it all comes down to the credibility to attack conclusions in subjects claimed to be science. The bad guys have been saying one can't do this but is rather questioning science itself. A last gasp? AMEN.
I read this guys book and it was informative on in geology correction is needed and always a astonishment or revolution.
I find from the evolution thumpers and company they try to say science can’t be wrong but only keeps adding information to change results.
They don’t like to accept that science can be wrong. its very prestige is that its a higher form of conclusion drawing.
AMEN.
Origin issues are not science. They are not testable in their claims of processes or results. not proved like actual science stuff.
So after time has passed with much “error” apparent in many subjects they must account for this. The new idea is that a paradigm is dominating thinkers in science and this controls imagination or free thinking and so error in subjects is replicating.
it all comes down to the credibility to attack conclusions in subjects claimed to be science. The bad guys have been saying one can’t do this but is rather questioning science itself.
A last gasp?

]]> By: bornagain77 http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/dominant-paradigms-in-science-and-their-attendant-anomalies/comment-page-1/#comment-359525 bornagain77 Mon, 19 Jul 2010 20:49:23 +0000 http://www.uncommondescent.com/?p=14182#comment-359525 Interesting article David Tyler as I had thought this issue was settled: Here is a review of a peer-reviewed ID article, by Casey Luskin, you may find very interesting: Peer-Reviewed Paper Investigating Origin of Information Endorses Irreducible Complexity and Intelligent Design http://www.evolutionnews.org/2010/07/peer-reviewed_paper_investigat036771.html#more Interesting article David Tyler as I had thought this issue was settled:

Here is a review of a peer-reviewed ID article, by Casey Luskin, you may find very interesting:

Peer-Reviewed Paper Investigating Origin of Information Endorses Irreducible Complexity and Intelligent Design
http://www.evolutionnews.org/2......html#more

]]>