But they are different and therefore must not be mixed. Any of these definitions are fine if used consistently. Or it can refer to the idea that all organisms share a common ancestor. It can refer to a shift in allele frequency in an organism’s DNA. Both evolutionists and creationists can be guilty of muddled thinking that results in muddled writing-papers in which terms are not defined or used consistently.Ĭonsider the term evolution. This type of problem frequently appears in debates over origins. Anything less is confusing at best and “not even wrong” at worst. They must carefully define important terms and use them in a consistent way. Therefore, scientists must be able to cogently articulate their hypotheses, observations, and methods.
Only when experimental methods are carefully articulated can they be critiqued or validated.
A hypothesis that is not clearly stated cannot be tested. It advances only when scientists are able to communicate their discoveries to other scientists for independent evaluation and confirmation. The author would have to substantially improve the paper in order for it to even be assessed as wrong. It was even worse than wrong-it was incoherent. The content was so garbled, however, that Pauli is said to have remarked that not only was the paper not right, it was “not even wrong.” He meant the paper was so poorly written, so muddled in its reasoning, that it was impossible to evaluate in any fashion. Physicist Wolfgang Pauli was once asked to review a technical paper and assess its accuracy.
0 kommentar(er)
