- NEW!
Help answer this question below.
Science is observation + action understood.
Stephen Jay Gould was one of the few scientists that I can think of who retained his personal faith in light of observed scientific fact.
In his essays in Natural History, he may have been the first science writer to propose the "bushy" theory of evolution.... and right he was.
Based on science being observed actions, I am not certain whether it is wise to believe that all actions have been observed. Yet, most scientists believe that some actions can never occur.
Is it more dangerous to assume that all actions have been observed, therefore, there is nothing left to observe/discuss?
"In science, 'fact' can only mean 'confirmed to such a degree that it would be perverse to withhold provisional assent.' I suppose that apples might start to rise tomorrow, but the possibility does not merit equal time in physics classrooms. - Stephen Jay Gould
It seems that hose who argue for magical solutions from the sky or against firm science fail to comprehend the truth of the above. Agreed?
Disagree - I have come to learn that most of science is a theory - not fact
What is the test called to determine pH?
by Answerbag Staff on January 9th, 2011
| 1 person likes this
Is animal testing good or bad?
by Answerbag Staff on January 8th, 2011
| 2 people like this
What are primary& secondary research?
by Answerbag Staff on January 8th, 2011
| 1 person likes this
Does four wrongs make a right?
by HoboJoe on November 5th, 2011
| 5 people like this
what gives transparency to all purpose synthetic liquid detergent?
by Barth_O on September 24th, 2011
| 1 person likes this
You're reading Looking at Stephen Jay Gould's quote below (see my ANSWER), is that what the creationist fail to understand about science?
Comments
Totally agree with your conclusion. Thanks.
by Jim in a Nautilus COAT on November 2nd, 2009