Turning back the clock

[Katazia]

http://www.house.state.mo.us/bills041/biltxt/intro/HB0911I.htm

To include the teaching of religious concepts as if they are science and enforce it by law is a return to past barbaric times.

Unbelievable.

Kat

 

[ScrollMaker]

Notice that they will teach the Theory of Evolution and the Hypothesis of Intelligent Design.

On this site: http://wine1.sb.fsu.edu/chm1045/notes/Intro/Theory/Theory.htm they compare theories versus hypotheses. A theory is an explanation of how something works with considerable facts to support it. A hypothesis is an explanation of how something works little or no facts supporting it. They use "the moon is made of cheese" as an example a hypothesis.

 

[Katazia]

Scroll,

On that simplistic definition of hypothesis what then is the difference between a religious belief, a hypothesis, and simple speculation?

I believe that for science a hypothesis is usually considered valid if it falsifiable. The idea of ID does not conform to that requirement.

Kat

 

[James R]

It is interesting to note that Newton's laws do not qualify as "scientific law", under the definition in the proposed bill.

Is Newton's laws are not scientific laws, I wonder what is.