Glenn responds
>
>Can you provide a reference to one single dictionary that says your
>definition of science is correct? All the definitions I have ever seen rule
>out the supernatual. I may not like this, and I do firmly believe that God
>intervenes in this world, but the definiition of science does not include the
>supernatural.
>
Related to testibility is repeatibility. To be considered valid science, a
claim should be testable by anyone who has the appropriate equipment and
repeats the conditions under which the phenomenon is claimed to occur. The
supernatural is excluded because it is assumed to be nonrepeatible.
Walter, if you claim a supernatural occurrence -- an act of God, say -- is
testable, are you not implicitly claiming that it is possible for an
experimenter to establish conditions under which God will do something,
predictably? And doesn't that amount to claiming that under these
conditions it is possible for a human experimenter to control God, however
slightly?
Bill Hamilton | Vehicle Systems Research
GM R&D Center | Warren, MI 48090-9055
810 986 1474 (voice) | 810 986 3003 (FAX)
hamilton@gmr.com (office) | whamilto@mich.com (home)