RE: [asa] Coulter, and science

Geology as historical science deals with the time development of the
history of earth. As an experimental science, geology uses physics and
chemistry to analyze the constitution of rocks, oil, etc. There is no
science without the data obtained with the methods of experimental
science. Besides the experimental aspect of science, there is
observational sciences, say, in astronomy and cosmology, where
experiments cannot be done with the system being dealt with. However,
the analysis of the observations is always based on results from the
experimental sciences.

=20

Moorad

=20

________________________________

From: Michael Roberts [mailto:michael.andrea.r@ukonline.co.uk]=20
Sent: Monday, July 10, 2006 9:58 AM
To: Iain Strachan
Cc: Alexanian, Moorad; Pim van Meurs; asa@calvin.edu
Subject: Re: [asa] Coulter, and science

=20

Yes, I was harsh. Over the years Moorad has refused to consider the
principles of historical science and in a subsequent post wrote
"Historical science =3D history + (results of) experimental science. " =
He
is plain wrong there. To follow the logic of his false view of science,
we would not have been able to find much oil or other minerals, nor
could we say anything about e.g. global warming.

=20

Bill was right to mention Young's book (now being revised) as this
explains historical methods in science.

=20

All need to remember that science isn't only experimental, it is also
historical, descriptive/comparative and theoretical, though at times one
cannot make strict demarcations. All this is complicated by the
"creationist" categorisation of operational and origins science, which
again is nonsense and a way of denigrating historical science which, of
course, leads to the ultimate blasphemy of an ancient earth and worse
still evilution!

=20

Michael

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Mon Jul 10 11:24:04 2006