Andrew, Time magazine had an interview w/ Collins and Dawkins. Both are great scientists and it was quite a neat interview. If I remember correctly, at the end, Dawkins agreed that a "greater being" can exist, just not in the form of Judeo-Christian God.
In regards to burden of proof - yes and no. Strictly speaking the First Law of Thermodynamics has not been proven (and cannot be mathematically proven). So, despite of being supported by experimental evidence, it has never been proven and this law remains axiomatic in nature.
Re: right-bashing. When I posted a conservative cartoon (link), no one accussed me of Liberal-bashing. I'd do more of them except that right now, everyone's "right-bashing," probably because the same reasons that the Republicans lost (Iraq war, corruption, spending).
You'd be surprised that my personal politics is nothing like you'd think.
Re: Cox & Forkum. I've subscribed to Gary Varvel, who is a conservative cartoonist. So far, he hasn't drawn anything on the it's-a-civil-war/not-a-civil-war issue or otherwise I would've posted it too... I checked and my syndication service does not carry Cox & Forkum. I'll check with C&F directly to see if I can carry them.
Re: not neat. C'mon, guys: isn't the reference to "I Can't Believe it's not Butter" kind of clever? (Plus, there are many posts on Neatorama that aren't qualified as "neat.")
And thank you Jenny for valiantly trying to bring the discussion back on topic.
The word "theory" in the English language is often used to mean conjecture or speculation, but in science it actually has a special meaning:
" A set of statements or principles devised to explain a group of facts or phenomena, especially one that has been repeatedly tested or is widely accepted and can be used to make predictions about natural phenomena."
So, when something is proven by science (or has not been proven false despite many, many decades of repeated testings), it's a "theory." When scientists are guessing, they call it "hypothesis."
He ran as a candidate of the Union of Conscientiously Work-Shy Elements. It's a fascinating story ...
In regards to burden of proof - yes and no. Strictly speaking the First Law of Thermodynamics has not been proven (and cannot be mathematically proven). So, despite of being supported by experimental evidence, it has never been proven and this law remains axiomatic in nature.
You'd be surprised that my personal politics is nothing like you'd think.
Re: Cox & Forkum. I've subscribed to Gary Varvel, who is a conservative cartoonist. So far, he hasn't drawn anything on the it's-a-civil-war/not-a-civil-war issue or otherwise I would've posted it too... I checked and my syndication service does not carry Cox & Forkum. I'll check with C&F directly to see if I can carry them.
Re: not neat. C'mon, guys: isn't the reference to "I Can't Believe it's not Butter" kind of clever? (Plus, there are many posts on Neatorama that aren't qualified as "neat.")
And thank you Jenny for valiantly trying to bring the discussion back on topic.
It is written by Francis Collins, one of the most famous and influential geneticists on the planet today. Here's a story about it on the Sunday Times.
" A set of statements or principles devised to explain a group of facts or phenomena, especially one that has been repeatedly tested or is widely accepted and can be used to make predictions about natural phenomena."
So, when something is proven by science (or has not been proven false despite many, many decades of repeated testings), it's a "theory." When scientists are guessing, they call it "hypothesis."